If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   Firefox about to surpass Chrome in popularity   (reviews.cnet.com) divider line 180
    More: Interesting, Firefox, private browsing, download manager, desktops, usability  
•       •       •

8423 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Apr 2013 at 3:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



180 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-02 09:19:06 PM  

moralpanic: veive: Had to switch back to FF from Chrome since Chrome keeps crashing scripts that FF will run.
Sure, Chrome is marginally faster at some things and uses a bit less RAM but I have a processor that runs 8 threads and 32gb of RAM. I'm not worried about resources, I want a browser that actually does the farking job even if that means it taps out 4 cores and 16GB of RAM under load- that still leaves me plenty of power to do other things with.

What scripts that Chrome crashes on that FF doesn't?

Link

Took me a bit to find one that I'm not under an NDA about.

/CSB
//Meh
///Not really
 
2013-04-02 09:49:22 PM  
AOL Browser works best
 
2013-04-02 09:50:20 PM  
Well right now, Chrome is giving me this message when I try to use Google to search:


This webpage is not availableThe webpage at  https://www.google.com/ might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.Error 15 (net::ERR_SOCKET_NOT_CONNECTED): Unknown error.
 
2013-04-02 09:50:43 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: lostcat: Used to use FF a lot when I was doing front-end development. But when Chrome came out I quickly dropped FF. I still keep it around in case I ever do some coding and want to check my work across browsers, but I have no use for the plug-ins/add-ons in my everday websurfing.

/do people still call it websurfing?

The correct PC term is mastursurfing.


I just want to ride her pleasure wave.
 
2013-04-02 09:55:00 PM  

Somaticasual: blue_2501: fisker: [i.imgur.com image 850x653]

Holy fark!  That's awesome.  Not sure if it's completely useful, but I imagine the visualization makes things quicker to spot.

Seconded, what plugin is that? It does look more "on the spot" than the web developer toolbar with element outlines enabled..


It's called Tilt
 
2013-04-02 10:09:12 PM  

enik: AdB

bemused outsider: neuroflare: enik: bulsd: Anyway have a plugin that will stop Drew's Money Message from appearing on every page?

It's really easy to AdBlock it when you're using Chrome.  www.fark.com##DIV[id="abPleaBar"]

thats works for FF as well

Oooohh!  I like this!
Thanks muchly!


Yep just got it to work in firefox.  Thanks.  I suppose I could have done it weeks ago and figured it out but was too lazy.
 
2013-04-02 10:13:26 PM  
I tried Firefox, but I just can't get used to thinking in Russian.

/Obscure?
 
2013-04-02 10:23:55 PM  

Mad_Radhu: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: A couple of proper add-ons and Firefox is significantly better than Chrome.

Noscript
FoxyProxy
YoutubeCommentSnob

I've never quite understood the script Nazis who block all the Javascript on a site and then whine about the site not working in the comments. Unless you are browsing the deep dark bowels of the internet, why be so paranoid about scripting on a site?


As a web developer let me just give a big fark you, to anyone that uses noscript. Yes, javascript helps deliver ads, it also is pretty vital to CSS3/HTML5 being able to eliminate Flash. Almost all of my websites now simply won't let you browse until you do turn on the scripts (and I don't have ads) because a truly dynamic page requires scripts to make a better design; especially using jQuery and asynchronous data requests (so you don't have loading). 

Get AdBlock, that's really all you need. If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies, you might want to reconsider what you are doing on the internet.
 
2013-04-02 10:28:43 PM  

GameSprocket: /Obscure?


Not even close to obscure
 
2013-04-02 10:29:23 PM  

phimuskapsi: . If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies


especially since you can turn off accepting cookies from the options in a browser itself.
 
2013-04-02 10:36:32 PM  
People using incognito to browse porn are lame...

You use incognito to research new business ideas of dubious legality or researching the background of people you might have to eliminate as competition.
 
2013-04-02 10:38:29 PM  

wildcardjack: People using incognito to browse porn are lame...

You use incognito to research new business ideas of dubious legality or researching the background of people you might have to eliminate as competition.


Some people are in or considering the porn industry. Your argument is invalid.
 
2013-04-02 10:43:32 PM  

phimuskapsi: Mad_Radhu: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: A couple of proper add-ons and Firefox is significantly better than Chrome.

Noscript
FoxyProxy
YoutubeCommentSnob

I've never quite understood the script Nazis who block all the Javascript on a site and then whine about the site not working in the comments. Unless you are browsing the deep dark bowels of the internet, why be so paranoid about scripting on a site?

As a web developer let me just give a big fark you, to anyone that uses noscript. Yes, javascript helps deliver ads, it also is pretty vital to CSS3/HTML5 being able to eliminate Flash. Almost all of my websites now simply won't let you browse until you do turn on the scripts (and I don't have ads) because a truly dynamic page requires scripts to make a better design; especially using jQuery and asynchronous data requests (so you don't have loading). 

Get AdBlock, that's really all you need. If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies, you might want to reconsider what you are doing on the internet.


In response, can I just say:

If I need to load more than 3 sites to make your site work, I won't bother.  If I'm on foo.com, and I need foo.com or cdn.foo.com to make the site work, that's fine.  If I need 20 others (or I can't tell which 2 of the 20 others I need), we have a problem.

/Currently running adblock plus flashblock.
 
2013-04-02 10:47:30 PM  

Rev.K: Holy sh*t, how is it possible in 2013, a browser can get so bloated and hog so much f*cking memory?


Dude, I just don't understand this argument...  I stopped caring about RAM usage, like, a decade ago.  Go buy some more RAM, bro.  It's not expensive.  I have 8GB in my computer.  I don't need that much.  But it was cheap and now I don't have to give a fark how much memory anything takes up.

Once you're through the looking glass, it's really hard to give a fark about memory usage.
 
2013-04-02 10:47:38 PM  
I still miss Ghostzilla Browser.
 
2013-04-02 10:48:30 PM  

verbaltoxin: Error 15 (net::ERR_SOCKET_NOT_CONNECTED)


Clear your browser cache and cookies. Close completely (verify with task manager). Re-open.

If it is still not fixed try:

Go to chrome://net-internals/ -> Sockets tab, and clicking "Flush socket pools" and "Close idle sockets"
 
2013-04-02 10:53:42 PM  

meyerkev: phimuskapsi: Mad_Radhu: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: A couple of proper add-ons and Firefox is significantly better than Chrome.

Noscript
FoxyProxy
YoutubeCommentSnob

I've never quite understood the script Nazis who block all the Javascript on a site and then whine about the site not working in the comments. Unless you are browsing the deep dark bowels of the internet, why be so paranoid about scripting on a site?

As a web developer let me just give a big fark you, to anyone that uses noscript. Yes, javascript helps deliver ads, it also is pretty vital to CSS3/HTML5 being able to eliminate Flash. Almost all of my websites now simply won't let you browse until you do turn on the scripts (and I don't have ads) because a truly dynamic page requires scripts to make a better design; especially using jQuery and asynchronous data requests (so you don't have loading). 

Get AdBlock, that's really all you need. If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies, you might want to reconsider what you are doing on the internet.

In response, can I just say:

If I need to load more than 3 sites to make your site work, I won't bother.  If I'm on foo.com, and I need foo.com or cdn.foo.com to make the site work, that's fine.  If I need 20 others (or I can't tell which 2 of the 20 others I need), we have a problem.

/Currently running adblock plus flashblock.


I only load from two sites, my own but use multiple scripts that I wrote myself and the jquery/ui libraries from google. Sometimes analytics.

I forgot that noscript can limit by site, been so long since I had it installed.
 
2013-04-02 10:55:35 PM  
phimuskapsi
As a web developer let me just give a big fark you, to anyone that uses noscript. Yes, javascript helps deliver ads, it also is pretty vital to CSS3/HTML5 being able to eliminate Flash. Almost all of my websites now simply won't let you browse until you do turn on the scripts (and I don't have ads) because a truly dynamic page requires scripts to make a better design; especially using jQuery and asynchronous data requests (so you don't have loading).


As a web developer and noscript user let me give a big fark you in reply because lots of the stuff people use scripts and especially jquery for are quite frankly idiotic and are waaay less cross-browser compatible than they think.


/and, as someone who has been anti-Flash for years, I kinda still prefer it over an HTML5+Ajax player which maxes out a quad core i7 as soon as you want the video to be larger than a thumbnail
 
2013-04-02 10:55:43 PM  

phimuskapsi: If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies, you might want to reconsider what you are doing on the internet.


Call me paranoid if you want, but I have a serious problem with allowing every tom.com, dick.net, and harry.org unilateral access to execute code on my computer.  I'm sure 99% of the time I'm just being overly cautious.  But malicious code can and is distributed through ads or other malicious scripts.

Same kind of thing with cookies.  I have a serious problem with some of the data websites want to store on my computer.  Not to mention the various scandals about irremovable cookies...

I'd rather take the approach of just allowing scripts and cookies on the very few sites that I actually trust.

meyerkev: If I need to load more than 3 sites to make your site work, I won't bother. If I'm on foo.com, and I need foo.com or cdn.foo.com to make the site work, that's fine. If I need 20 others (or I can't tell which 2 of the 20 others I need), we have a problem.


Totally agree, dude.
 
2013-04-02 10:59:16 PM  
i use netscape navigator
 
2013-04-02 11:03:57 PM  
Who needs Firefox? I get a web browser free with my AOL subscription.
 
2013-04-02 11:13:44 PM  

neuroflare: www.fark.com##DIV[id="abPleaBar"]


I can't get this to work in Adblock in FF, what am I doing wrong?
 
2013-04-02 11:25:21 PM  

ThePunishr: neuroflare: www.fark.com##DIV[id="abPleaBar"]

I can't get this to work in Adblock in FF, what am I doing wrong?


tools > adblock > open blockable > copypasta
 
2013-04-02 11:27:11 PM  
Every time there's a FF hate thread, I post the same thing:

If you're too stupid to work about:config, you only deserve IE.
 
2013-04-02 11:32:30 PM  
neuroflare:

tools > adblock > open blockable > copypasta

Got it, thanks.
 
2013-04-02 11:35:30 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: stewbert: Smeggy Smurf: Chrome has a porn mode.  It's called look at porn without being ashamed.

Yeah, by using Incognito. Very ITG

Who would you hide your porn from?  A boss?  Work is for farking.  Porn is for home to share with whoever you have waiting for you.


It can save explanation time when you are browsing along side someone and you type "F" in the URL bar, and FireFox suggests you may be trying to go back to "FurryAndDwarfYaoi.com"
 
2013-04-02 11:45:43 PM  

Rev.K: HIlarious.

Just last night, I've had the last straw with Firefox. Holy sh*t, how is it possible in 2013, a browser can get so bloated and hog so much f*cking memory?

Hello Chrome.


Uh, Chrome gets up there pretty quickly if you keep more than one tab open.
 
2013-04-02 11:49:41 PM  

Vlad_the_Inaner: Smeggy Smurf: stewbert: Smeggy Smurf: Chrome has a porn mode.  It's called look at porn without being ashamed.

Yeah, by using Incognito. Very ITG

Who would you hide your porn from?  A boss?  Work is for farking.  Porn is for home to share with whoever you have waiting for you.

It can save explanation time when you are browsing along side someone and you type "F" in the URL bar, and FireFox suggests you may be trying to go back to "FurryAndDwarfYaoi.com"


Google already offers up a steady diet of amusing suggestions.  If you had any idea how often on my lunch hour I search for the strange stories to offer here you'd never question why stuff like ovulating wombats or airhose nudism shows up.

/when I die my browser history will be a testament to good old fashioned American WTF knowhow
 
2013-04-03 12:04:46 AM  
I have IE, Chrome and FF latest versions on my machine and Chrome is winning the Pepsi challenge.
YMMV


img542.imageshack.us
 
2013-04-03 12:08:06 AM  
It does say something that most people ITT are arguing over two browsers paid for by the same company.

Who really "owns" your browser?
 
2013-04-03 12:12:09 AM  

The Voice of Doom: BarkingUnicorn
Y'know what Firefox still can't do that Chrome can?

Fetch me a Foxnews.com URL.

I guess that''s a feature, not a bug. :-)

Problem seems to be the combination of Firefox with my ISP's Microtik router firmware. I get "Mikrotik HttpProxy Error: 400 Bad Request." Copy the URL to Chrome or IE and it works. Copy and paste it into FF and it doesn't.

All foxnews URLs? Or just some?
Do you have an example?

It should be pretty simple to figure out by comparing at the request headers.


I wouldn't know a request header from a request for  head. :-)

All, for over a year.  Doesn't matter if I click a Fark link or type FoxNews.com into the address bar.

I forgot to mention that the same problem has spread to news.yahoo.com/* URLs too, about a month ago. Also, I reset FF to its default state twice with no joy.

AV scans show nothing.
 
2013-04-03 12:12:43 AM  

red5ish: I have IE, Chrome and FF latest versions on my machine and Chrome is winning the Pepsi challenge.
YMMV


[img542.imageshack.us image 470x644]


Pepsi use to be big on interracial marriage back then?
 
2013-04-03 12:21:40 AM  

Rev.K: HIlarious.

Just last night, I've had the last straw with Firefox. Holy sh*t, how is it possible in 2013, a browser can get so bloated and hog so much f*cking memory?

Hello Chrome.


Hope you don't use Yahoo much.
 
2013-04-03 12:32:17 AM  

Honest Bender: Once you're through the looking glass, it's really hard to give a fark about memory usage.


I brought a job to a site last week, big complicated device that was controlled by a tiny W7 embedded computer.  At the last minute, I thought to grab a crappy old 19" LCD just in case they didn't have a convenient monitor to test it with.  Good thing i did, everything they had were frickin CRTs!!!  They were all oohiing and ahhhing over my busted out monitor* and not the $5000 worth of slick optics and shiat I'd put together.  Crazy world.

Anyway, I agree with you but there are apparently tons of people whose work computers completely suck ass and they probably need a slim browser to log onto their company's 16-bit color geocities site to update their timecards or whatnot.

* this thing has had smoke coming out of it but somehow trudges on, I treat it like it's one step from the trashpile
 
2013-04-03 12:33:47 AM  
I just uninstalled Firefox the other day; I kept having it lock up and crash and I got fed up having to reload my browser each time. I tried IE again, that lasted for two days before I wanted to throw my laptop out of the window. So now I am using Chrome and thus far love it.

/maybe I'm a sheeple
//baaaaah
 
2013-04-03 12:41:16 AM  

red5ish: I have IE, Chrome and FF latest versions on my machine and Chrome is winning the Pepsi challenge.
YMMV


[img542.imageshack.us image 470x644]


But there are black children in the picture you posted, so you must be racist!

Black children in that era? Was that a product of Brown v BOE?
 
2013-04-03 12:41:19 AM  

meyerkev: If I need to load more than 3 sites to make your site work, I won't bother. If I'm on foo.com, and I need foo.com or cdn.foo.com to make the site work, that's fine. If I need 20 others (or I can't tell which 2 of the 20 others I need), we have a problem.

/Currently running adblock plus flashblock.


I don't use noscript, so I don't know. I would hope that you're only blocking 3rd-party scripts by default. But then, why? Latest browsers won't load cookies from those domains. Do you globally whitelist jQuery, prototype, or google code domains for common libs that are commonly hosted there?
 
2013-04-03 12:55:25 AM  
I tried Chrome.  Discovered that despite what the fanboys keep saying, it still tracks way more user data than Firefox, since Firefox allows a lot more custom privacy adjustments.  Went straight back to Firefox and have never looked back.
 
2013-04-03 12:58:52 AM  

Rev.K: HIlarious.

Just last night, I've had the last straw with Firefox. Holy sh*t, how is it possible in 2013, a browser can get so bloated and hog so much f*cking memory?

Hello Chrome.


You might want to look at getting more RAM in to your machine, 2GB really isn't enough for a modern machine.  Although if you have 8 - 16GB in there and Firefox is using 2GB for itself and you've still got 4GB+ free.... what are you complaining about?

And yes I understand the pain of having a Core 2 Duo that's more than capable of handing the extra RAM but only takes DDR2.
 
2013-04-03 01:04:41 AM  

HotWingAgenda: I tried Chrome.  Discovered that despite what the fanboys keep saying, it still tracks way more user data than Firefox, since Firefox allows a lot more custom privacy adjustments.  Went straight back to Firefox and have never looked back.


if you get one of the open source chromium builds,it is a bit less pwned by Google.  What really pissed me off about chrome was its "haha you launched to browse?  Sorry, go away for 10 minutes while we update" attitude.  Now I just use chromium on known sites w/o 3rd party ads, like Netflix, and don't worry about updates for security.

/haven't looked at the canary thing yet
 
2013-04-03 01:12:12 AM  

meyerkev: If I need to load more than 3 sites to make your site work, I won't bother. If I'm on foo.com, and I need foo.com or cdn.foo.com to make the site work, that's fine. If I need 20 others (or I can't tell which 2 of the 20 others I need), we have a problem.


Oh, sweet Jeebus, this!

And I hate it when Web site operators farm out critical content to multple third-party servers that may be 30 hops away from their site and halfway around the globe.  If one of those help-servers is down or there's one bad hop, your page won't load and I'm getting pissed.

A shiatload of newspapers are using something called extras.mnginteractive.com and that farking server ALWAYS hangs on me!  Takes half a dozen reloads and a cuppa joe to get a damned page, if it ever arrives.

If you wanna run a Web site, run a Web site and not a distributed Frankenstein's monster!
 
2013-04-03 01:14:56 AM  

phimuskapsi: Mad_Radhu: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: A couple of proper add-ons and Firefox is significantly better than Chrome.

Noscript
FoxyProxy
YoutubeCommentSnob

I've never quite understood the script Nazis who block all the Javascript on a site and then whine about the site not working in the comments. Unless you are browsing the deep dark bowels of the internet, why be so paranoid about scripting on a site?

As a web developer let me just give a big fark you, to anyone that uses noscript. Yes, javascript helps deliver ads, it also is pretty vital to CSS3/HTML5 being able to eliminate Flash. Almost all of my websites now simply won't let you browse until you do turn on the scripts (and I don't have ads) because a truly dynamic page requires scripts to make a better design; especially using jQuery and asynchronous data requests (so you don't have loading). 

Get AdBlock, that's really all you need. If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies, you might want to reconsider what you are doing on the internet.


Right now, on this webpage, I'm using noscript to block three sites I don't recognize, don't trust, and know for a fact are not necessary to browse this site.

Additionally, my ghostery is blocking 7 known identity trackers, and my ad-block is killing a slew of other third-party scripts.  And this is all just on Fark, a site I've been coming to for nearly a decade, run by a group of people that I would personally trust with my actual wallet.
 
2013-04-03 01:33:03 AM  

HotWingAgenda: phimuskapsi: Mad_Radhu: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: A couple of proper add-ons and Firefox is significantly better than Chrome.

Noscript
FoxyProxy
YoutubeCommentSnob

I've never quite understood the script Nazis who block all the Javascript on a site and then whine about the site not working in the comments. Unless you are browsing the deep dark bowels of the internet, why be so paranoid about scripting on a site?

As a web developer let me just give a big fark you, to anyone that uses noscript. Yes, javascript helps deliver ads, it also is pretty vital to CSS3/HTML5 being able to eliminate Flash. Almost all of my websites now simply won't let you browse until you do turn on the scripts (and I don't have ads) because a truly dynamic page requires scripts to make a better design; especially using jQuery and asynchronous data requests (so you don't have loading). 

Get AdBlock, that's really all you need. If you are so paranoid about scripts and cookies, you might want to reconsider what you are doing on the internet.

Right now, on this webpage, I'm using noscript to block three sites I don't recognize, don't trust, and know for a fact are not necessary to browse this site.

Additionally, my ghostery is blocking 7 known identity trackers, and my ad-block is killing a slew of other third-party scripts.  And this is all just on Fark, a site I've been coming to for nearly a decade, run by a group of people that I would personally trust with my actual wallet.


Well, unfortunately that's the cost of doing business on the web. Advertisers need to make money, people block ads (myself included) so some tracking is going to happen so they can still ultimately get paid, that's how content comes to you. I actually disable adblock on Fark because they show a message saying that Fark feeds their squirrel with revenue from the ads (lol). The web isn't free guys, content costs money, design costs money, servers cost money. For all you subscribers, wtg, that's great that you support them, but millions don't in the direct way you do.

The Voice of Doom: phimuskapsi
As a web developer and noscript user let me give a big fark you in reply because lots of the stuff people use scripts and especially jquery for are quite frankly idiotic and are waaay less cross-browser compatible than they think.

/and, as someone who has been anti-Flash for years, I kinda still prefer it over an HTML5+Ajax player which maxes out a quad core i7 as soon as you want the video to be larger than a thumbnail


If you are maxing out your CPU on a HTML5 video, you aren't GPU accelerating the browser/video. 

jQuery is COMPLETELY cross-browser compatible. It's javascript. There are a few minor differences between the webkit/moz browsers to IE, but I'm talking very very minor, maybe one or two functions. AJAX is here to stay. That's how all the fancy notifications and so on work. It's actively doing data work while you work, rather than locking up your browser while it waits for a response from the server. Like logging in without a page refreshing. People want speed, ajax IS speed; and ajax is just a small part of the jQuery library. 

I also wanted to note that the tracking stuff that runs in Chrome is also mostly for your benefit, it preloads your more visited sites and so on. That's why it's so fast compared to other browsers. It also has the fastest JS interpreter out of the bunch, and the developer tools are better than firebug (though if you want it, you can get it for Chrome), it isn't as bloated as FF due to sandboxing pages as individual processes but it still uses a lot of RAM. Though, most PC's should have 4GB or up as standard now anyway, someone said earlier that it really shouldn't matter that much (or you could close some tabs).
 
2013-04-03 02:09:40 AM  
Is there an add-on or anything out there that lets imgur work with Noscript in Firefox? Noscript seems to have permanently broken imgur, even with it being allowed.
 
2013-04-03 02:51:18 AM  
I tried Chrome.  It gives up too easily.  Firefox will load a page on a slow connection, but Chrome is like knock once and instead of waiting for someone to answer the door, Chrome pisses on the porch and runs off.  Refuses to load damn pages.
 
2013-04-03 03:27:55 AM  

Smeggy Smurf: stewbert: Smeggy Smurf: Chrome has a porn mode.  It's called look at porn without being ashamed.

Yeah, by using Incognito. Very ITG

Who would you hide your porn from?  A boss?  Work is for farking.  Porn is for home to share with whoever you have waiting for you.


Chrome, if you're signed into your Google account of any flavor (gmail, youtube, etc) will record your web searches and in some cases make them public to anyone on your friends list.

If you search porn in Google and you aren't in Incognito mode you're essentially broadcasting your search results to everyone you know.
 
2013-04-03 03:59:58 AM  
Am I the only one that sees the value of clean sessions for development and especially debugging, but doesn't particularly see the value of the thing for porn?  If you've authorized someone to see your search history or whatever then it should probably be someone you're not ashamed to let in on your porn habits, and if your significant other is snooping in your browser history then you really shouldn't be dating/have married them.

gadian: I tried Chrome.  It gives up too easily.  Firefox will load a page on a slow connection, but Chrome is like knock once and instead of waiting for someone to answer the door, Chrome pisses on the porch and runs off.  Refuses to load damn pages.


I've had chrome run for thirty full seconds before loading a page, having a connection bad enough that what you're talking about is an issue is... probably not that common.

Also, a browser constantly pinging a target without ever deciding that's enough and returning a 404 (or lost connection) is more of a bug than a feature, even if it's useful in our case.  Kind of like how RealPlayer used to not check for corrupted files and would let you play some segment of them before hitting the bad bit and crashing (where other players wouldn't load the files at all).
 
2013-04-03 04:18:24 AM  
 
2013-04-03 04:41:34 AM  

Smeggy Smurf: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Smeggy Smurf: stewbert: Smeggy Smurf: Chrome has a porn mode.  It's called look at porn without being ashamed.

Yeah, by using Incognito. Very ITG

Who would you hide your porn from?  A boss?  Work is for farking.  Porn is for home to share with whoever you have waiting for you.

Your kids?

I read Easyrider magazine at age 8.  Tits aren't going to hurt a preteen boy.


That really depends how big they are.

/will go have a seat over there
 
2013-04-03 05:13:07 AM  
People complaining about Firefox's bloat don't seem to understand it isn't bloated, it's just fully customizable with capabilities the others don't have. Learn how to use it and decide what you want and don't and it's the best thing out there by far.
 
Displayed 50 of 180 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report