Jump to content

360 Extreme Explorer ArcticFoxie Versions


Recommended Posts


1 minute ago, Dave-H said:

Unfortunately it seems to be difficult, if not impossible, to see Instagram comments without logging in.

Sorry, I don't have an Instagram account.  So hopefully somebody else may be able to offer assistance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like I found something.

I found three different Instagram "click here to follow" web pages that only contain a description but all three of those web pages are displaying "squares".

I don't have an account so that's all the futher I can get.

But all three use a font for emojis called Twemoji Mozilla.

Which to me wreaks of a web master that only cares how Firefox renders the emojis, but I digress.

Here's a github if interested in compiling Twemoji - https://github.com/twitter/twemoji

Other than that, I'm not finding a way to "install" Twemoji on XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

As far as that "shield" font, it's a font called "FontAwesome".

image.thumb.png.8b0e7c4033e454478a4a601d93aaed07.png

image.thumb.png.6f4a4718a2594e3529c44ce9dd507f64.png

Nope , not working ! As you can see on the screenshot - this font is not blocked. 

MORONIC_FONT.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

Nope , not working ! As you can see on the screenshot - this font is not blocked. 

When NoScript, HOSTS file, uMatrix, UBO, you name it, blocks a font, it is still displayed in the .css element.  So I still think you have something blocking FontAwesome from being "fetched".

What extensions are you using?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did what you told and I appreciate you're trying to help - still not working , don't bother really . I don't care about them . At least they moved this ugly mole from Dave's chin and placed it above his right ear . I wrote them and asked to do it because it looked really ugly . (like a huge mole)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, too funny.  You could always use Stylus to move the "mole".  Or use Stylus to not even display the "mole".  I actually use Stylus to not only not display the "mole", but to not even display that profile "face" AT ALL.

No face for Dave-H.  No face for D.Draker.  No face for Dixel.  No blobfish for whoever used to use a blobfish.  etc...

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you all do without (cute little) Mister Blobfish  to start off the day. 

Wait ... please help, there is something that makes Daves glasses look blue. There must be a setting somewhere. Poor Dave ... I feel for ya man. 

OK ... serious question. 

https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/ssca

Experimental enabled SharedArrayBuffer support in JavaScript.

Enable SharedArrayBuffer support in JavaScript. – Mac, Windows, Linux, Chrome OS, Android

#shared-array-buffer

                     This is at its default and undefined (again, don't know what that means). Should this flag be set to disable or enable? I'm trying to research myself. I read this would add protection but could slow things down and I don't want to to do that. 

I'm hungry for some reason now :)

Edited by XPerceniol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that is what I was thinking, but wondering because this is Chrome 69 and pretty old considering. Of course, this is XP so no protection on the hardware level, but that isn't my desire anyway as I'm trying to get more speed and updates slow things down. I suspset it would go hand-in-hand with isolation flags that @Sampei was talking about. Do you guys recomend enabling the buffer? I'm not sure what default is. 

EDIT:

Since I've also:

WebAssembly threads support.

Enables support for the WebAssembly Threads proposal. Implies #shared-array-buffer and #enable-webassembly. – Mac, Windows, Linux, Chrome OS, Android

#enable-webassembly-threads

                     Set to disabled (I never use wasm), I'll also roll with that disabled and let you know what Mister Blobfish says. 

Edited by XPerceniol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spectre was public knowledge in January 2018 and even "grandma" knew what it was by May through July of 2018.

Chrome v69 was released in September 2018.

Chrome addressed Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities with the release of Chrome v64 in January 2018  --  https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/900606/Google-Chrome-update-patch-Meltdown-Spectre-Intel-fix-version-64

Firefox releases also addressed Spectre and Meltdown in January 2018  --  https://support.mozilla.org/bm/questions/1198249

I would keep the 360Chrome v11 (Chrome v69) flag at DEFAULT and not change it at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, XPerceniol said:

Wait ... please help, there is something that makes Daves glasses look blue. There must be a setting somewhere. Poor Dave ... I feel for ya man.

My glasses are blue!
:lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...