Conversation
Notices
-
@widget Fair enough. I /am/ using the data for evil.
Tuesday, 22-May-12 18:19:04 UTC from web-
Ugh for some reason today Firefox is using over 900,000K memory, making everything just a bit slow, and I'm not doing anything different than usual.
-
@ecmc Try closing it and reopening it.
-
@toksyuryel Hurr. Of course, I don't know why I didn't think of that in the first place. But yeah, that seems to have fixed it.
-
@ecmc Welcome to the wonderful world of memory leaks :D
-
@toksyuryel @ecmc And the reason why I seem to be coming off Firefox. If it wants to use 1GB of memory, while I've got one tab open, without opening and closing, then I don't want any business with it.
-
@scribble Just don't leave it open overnight. Problem solved. Most of the memory leaks aren't firefox's fault anyway, they're caused by flash.
-
@widget Only extension I seem to have is Adblock, and that can't be using that much memory.
-
@toksyuryel I never do. It's usually an hour of browsing, and then it lags like hell on everything.
-
@scribble Do you load any flash objects early into that hour?
-
@widget Like my car!
-
@toksyuryel @widget Usually. But then again, YouTube's HTML5 roll out doesn't work (as in some use it, others don't), so in order to use it, I need Flash.
-
@scribble This seems to be your problem. Try running noscript too, it helps a ton.
-
@widget Yeah that's the problem with flash, once you load it it does not close itself. Even after you navigate away from the page with the flash object it stays open in the background, continuing to leak memory.
-
@toksyuryel I tried NoScript, but hated the fact it popped up every single time with stuff I don't know about.
-
@scribble That's pretty much the problem. Flash stays open once it's been loaded, even after you close all pages with flash objects on them. It continues to leak memory the entire time.
-
@scribble You can configure it to not use pop ups.
-
@widget isn't that clicktoflash?
-
@toksyuryel I've never seen that option. And besides, what would NoScript even do to make Firefox work better anyway?
-
@widget Unfortunate considering it's non-technical users who could benefit the most from having it.
-
@scribble You didn't look hard enough then. And what it does is prevent scripts and flash objects from loading that you don't allow it to load. Preventing these greatly improves performance and reduces the amount of memory leaks.
-
@widget Just a heads-up, RDNRefresh seems to run better for me with Scriptish than with Greasemonkey.
-
@toksyuryel But the only Flash thing I don't want to see is ads, usually. Flash sites and YouTube are the only things stopping me from uninstalling it.
-
@colfax Firefox 12 has a bug which causes problems for Greasemonkey. This has been a known issue for weeks now. The problem is fixed in Firefox 13.
-
@scribble It allows you to selectively load only the flash objects you want to see and only when you want to see them. This has an additional benefit on youtube in that nothing autoplays by default.
-
@widget That's why I didn't like it. I keep seeing that it's necessary, but having to change certain things for every single site I visit is a pain I'd rather not deal with.
-
@widget It's a nuisance at first, but once it becomes a habit I've found myself enjoying reading the WOT page for each domain and determining whether or not to block it. There's a strange kind of pleasure to be had in marking another tracking, analytics, or ad site as "untrusted".
-
@scribble You only have to do it once for each site. The settings persist and are remembered when you return. And you only have to do it when something doesn't work. If the site works fine without scripts there's usually no reason to enable them for that site.
-
@toksyuryel But the problem is having to select each one I don't want, one by one, and deactivate it. I'd rather not go through that much work just to make it slightly better. Besides, Chrome runs well and doesn't seem to use up memory like it's a buffet.
-
@widget Oh? Well that's good to know.
-
@scribble The extra work is worth it, IMO. In addition to the performance benefits I also obtain peace of mind in knowing that I'm most likely not running any malicious scripts.
-
@widget They'd rather waste it with their antivirus I guess.
-
@toksyuryel But how will I know what's malicious or not? I'd rather not spend 10 minutes seeing if a script is malicious or not for each and every one of them. Maybe I'm just hard to please. http://ur1.ca/9afkt
-
@widget I take it you're blocking RDN's analytics?
-
@scribble Middle clicking on a domain in its list takes you to a page where you can view the WOT scorecard for the site which usually also includes a short description of what kind of site it is. It generally takes only a couple seconds to see whether a domain is worth enabling or not once you get used to the process.
-
@widget If you're just reflexively blocking every JS wouldn't it be even faster to just turn of JS in the browser wholesale
-
@ceruleanspark Because we don't block *every* js, just the ones that aren't required for the site to function as desired.
-
@ceruleanspark oh no now cerulean can tell how many time I've searched notices for "clop" in the last three hours ( #spoiler nine)
- likes this. -
@redenchilada I can actually see that in realtime too. It's really rather impressive
Toksyuryel likes this. -
@redenchilada js isn't required for that actually, and indeed I can't see how it would be useful for it.
-
@ceruleanspark ...Really? :3c
-
@redenchilada "Cerulean Spark is the worst admin"
-
@ceruleanspark and see some.
-
