https://digiday.com/marketing/google-de … yet-again/

Can anyone say if they are still killing ad-blockers on the scheduled date?

The creators of discourse and webcomponents, are trying to solve a problem they created. No one should program anything like the web with any programming languages that are bloated or screwed up. Actually, EDIT: not merely screwed up, SCREWED UP on MULTIPLE levels!

lol.

If you not having problems, with discourse, then no need to worry.

Browsers aside, I prefer "If you not having problems with discourse, then you need to worry.", or simply "If you're using discourse, you have a problem."
That thing is the most obnoxious "forum" software I have ever had the misfortune to encounter.

@zapper
Out of curiosity, I installed Chromium, opened these sites in it and FF.
Honestly, I don't see the difference.
What should you pay attention to?

Regards.

I was speaking of for palemoon, basilisk-browser, iceweasel-uxp and similar.

Basically, XUL web browsers these fixes help with.

If you not having problems, with discourse, then no need to worry.

So why did I get a notice of pending loss of support on ONE copy of my various Devuan/Chimaera installs and who put it out?

...
Can someone tell me where to find a clear list of support dates for Chromium on various versions of Debian so I can figure out what this might mean?

perhaps one of these?
ttps://packages.debian.org/en/chromium
ttps://packages.debian.org/stable/chromium
ttps://packages.debian.org/bullseye/chromium
ttps://packages.debian.org/buster/chromium
ttps://wiki.debian.org/Chromium

Over this past New Years weekend I update my various systems. All of them currently run Chimaera, as I always wait for the wrinkles to be worked out in the latest releases. Despite all of the systems running the same version of Devuan, and having Chromium installed (some also have Chrome), only one of the them gave me a warning about Chromium soon losing support on older versions of Debian. Not Devuan, but Debian. Since Devuan is based on Debian, though, I take this to be an important notice. I wonder why I didn't get it on all of the systems? Would different packages possibly be sent to systems running Chimaera based on other configuration details? And one of these packages had the warning?

I have since tried to find a 'roadmap' of Chromium development but cannot seem to find any clear info. Can someone tell me where to find a clear list of support dates for Chromium on various versions of Debian so I can figure out what this might mean?

Regards.

Not sure what you mean by discourse websites; the sites that don't work for me are sites that use things like Chrome-specific ways of doing video/audio via complex JS code. I've no idea how one might work around this dependency.

Also, what I don't expect in my lifetime is the ability to browse online, without any handicap or loss of functionality, with keyboard only, zero mouse use. I don't believe there's a big audience for this even among those who prefer no corporation driven designs.

The discourse websites, such as nitrokey's forum or, mnt research forum, the creators of the mnt reform design anotherwords.

https://community.mnt.re/

https://support.nitrokey.com/

You may notice the your web browser isn't up to date nonsense and how you need to upgrade to browse happy bs.

There are fixes for some of those websites. It requires modify http response and specific filters such as this:

[["/^/",["/browser-detect-/",["/.*/g",""]],["/^\\/assets\\/discourse-[0-9a-f]{4}/",["(.d-modal-legacy\"","(.d-modal-legacy)\"","document.execCommand(\"insertText\",!1,","this._textarea.setRangeText("]]]]

Palemoon forums users have figured this out, which is awesome.

Also, what I don't expect in my lifetime is the ability to browse online, without any handicap or loss of functionality, with keyboard only, zero mouse use. I don't believe there's a big audience for this even among those who prefer no corporation driven designs.

I keep Chromium around for those few sites that refuse to work without it, which in my case fortunately is only a small handful. (I can live without the rest.)  I used to be a big Opera fan until they sold out and switched to a Chrome engine. .

There are ways to use discourse websites even with using palemoon or other uxp web browsers.

I don't think it won't happen in your life time, unless you are 60+ already.

Might take a few decades but I don't think its impossible. Although, a rising up against corporations is needed first. Its slowly happening due to corporations and their abusing smart device bs. Tethering stuff that doesn't need to be tethered, etc...

And yeah, I keep Chromium around for those few sites that refuse to work without it, which in my case fortunately is only a small handful. (I can live without the rest.)  I used to be a big Opera fan until they sold out and switched to a Chrome engine.  But over time my own tastes have also shifted; these days I prefer keyboard-driven UIs than anything that requires the rodent.  My dream is that one day I can use a browser completely rodent-free... alas, I don't think that dream will come true in my lifetime.

The thing about completely independent browsers is that the browsers of today are no longer merely some app, they are an OS unto themselves (for better or for worse). That means a one-person dev team isn't gonna cut it.

I don't know if you wrote this with Pale Moon in mind, but the "nay-sayers" have been saying this about Pale Moon for at least as long as I've been using it, which is about 12 years now.

Unfortunately this is true, and more so for Pale Moon, which is why one should always have a secondary browser anyway.

The thing about completely independent browsers is that the browsers of today are no longer merely some app, they are an OS unto themselves (for better or for worse). That means a one-person dev team isn't gonna cut it. Current web standards are huge, there are tons and tons of "standard" specs and de facto standard features that websites simply assume to exist.  If it were up to me, I'd stay away from browsers completely... but it's no longer possible because nowadays just about everything depends on it -- online banking, paying bills, etc., all require browser access of some sort.  And while I usually browse with JS turned off (IMO allowing arbitrary Turing-complete code written by arbitrary online personae of unknown trustworthiness to run locally is a horrible idea), some critical sites like banks simply don't work without it. So I have to enable JS at least for those sites.  And many of those sites depend on bleeding-edge features that break in subtle ways when you're not using Chromium or FF's JS engine. Some sites outright don't work on FF, you have to use Chrome/Chromium.

It's a horrible situation, and I'm not sure what we can do about it. Perhaps sandbox the browser itself and use separate instances per website that share no data with each other?  That's an idea. But again, an independent browser project is a very big one, that needs a lot of resources to pull off.  The good ole days when anybody could write a HTML parser that renders some semblance of a page on-screen are long gone.