Am tired, but bit confused at sequence of events.

Did Russia ban Mozilla from offering specific extensions, whereupon Mozilla removed for Russian users the banned extensions?

Or…

Did Russia ban Mozilla from offering some undefined type of extension, whereupon Mozilla removed for Russian users any which seemed to fall under the ban under an abundance of caution until they could assess each & reinstate those which did not fit the ban?

Or, more worryingly, but maybe implied by the supposed temporary intent of the ban…

Did Russia ban Mozilla from offering specific extensions, whereupon Mozilla temporarily removed for Russian users the extensions in order to give Russia the ability to track or otherwise meddle with Russian users of those extensions… or to enable Russia to interfere with the extensions’ code for their own ends?

I feel I can make a reasonable guess, but there’s a fairly big safety issue here depending on what happened.

Anyone dissenting within an authoritarian regime knows to exercise extreme caution, but always good to put out reminders to have multiple layers of protection, so if one fails you are still ok.

If they’re incidental to some other thing you are filming, probably ok but consider blurring their faces prior to publication.

If filming as evidence, consider not uploading or sharing unless you have exhausted other avenues of getting that evidence to the relevant people.

True, though curiously if you appear with a big camera people respond far better than to a phone camera, despite the familiarity of the latter.

You could try NextDNS. It won’t let you designate access per app, but you can create custom blocklists. Short-term logging makes it easy to see at a glance which domains are being requested, and it doesn’t take long to get it all set up so that your apps only contact stuff which is strictly necessary in your view. Also comes with many blocklists to choose from, as well as other useful settings.

Having intermittent difficulties loading various things from different phone browsers for the past hour. More so on Firefox.

Have yet to try desktop browsers.

Great news, and looks like some EU institutions and Germany are gearing up to do similar, which should encourage other countries & organisations to follow, and massively expand open source development.

How dystopian.

That one’s good enough to suggest to them!

Can see why they’d maybe be wary of getting into appraising open source projects if taking payments, but maybe something they could collaborate on with EFF & others. Maybe also that “alternative to” project, which doesn’t currently focus on open source stuff but naturally covers quite a lot of it.

Maybe just so new users realise they’re a thing.

Firefox out of the box isn’t very attractive, so mixing in themes by default maybe helps retain new people without driving us lot away.

We will arse them on the beaches?

They hear someone recommend it, maybe on foot of a conversation about privacy concerns, and give it a try.

Doesn’t mean they’ve got to grips with it, but if they haven’t uninstalled it, they probably retain the intent to try.

It has never occurred to me to do either of those things, and apparently hasn’t to anyone I’m in contact with either.

Though I don’t use group chats or send files in Signal either, so there’s that.

SMS is my primary mode of contact with the rest if the world. I use Signal as well, but most people I know only use SMS.

Start sending invites to Signal. Setting up group chats can help too, as invitations to those create mild FOMO in the mind of the invitee, then once they have the app they can use it for things besides group chats.

“When you connect your phone to the car via bluetooth or usb your phone will trust the car and hand over the data.”

USB charging I can understand, but seems odd that phones do not block data transfers (besides that needed to manage charging) unless the user explicitly permits it.

I guess people use Bluetooth to connect to car speakers, but again, why are the phones being so permissive with what they send?

Bit behind the times here, but how are cars even accessing this information, unless the phone is built into the car system, and the user has an cellular/data/wi-fi account with the car manufacturer?

Point is, one can decrypt each email individually. That slows an malicious attacker rummaging in your device from finding what they are after as much as it does you.

You wouldn’t be alone in wanting this feature, but for those who need rather than prefer to encrypt, the option to store locally in plaintext is a major risk. On balance it seems better for developers to pay heed to that than to our preferences.

For the rest of us, we can download the emails we wish to refer to with ease, or we can create aides memoire to make it easy to locate specific emails later.

Just as it inconveniences you to have to decrypt to search, it would similarly slow down anyone malicious who gains access to your machine.

Am in favour of allowing users to decide which features are best for their needs, but this seems like it would be easy to forget to reinstitute local encryption after a search, so can also understand why developers prevent storing in plaintext.

Or like someone just got smacked upside of their head.

If it were me, I’d use that browser solely for FB. Firefox allows one to have multiple instances. Harden it as much as you can whilst still able to use the bits of FB you’re interested in.