Pale Moon forum

So, I still am experiencing issues with a specific site - minds - even on the latest stable PM release 27.7.1 , with or without ublock/noscript - pages do not display properly, was wondering if anyone had any ideas on what to try to get PM to properly display minds ?

Latest release is 27.7.2

badnick wrote:Latest release is 27.7.2

Just upgraded, issue remains though.

Hmm...looks OK on the MX Linux build: The font is different. Also, I'm pretty sure that the graphics missing in your version above the messed up choices are actually font glyphs...do you have font downloads from sites disabled somehow? I know you can do that with Ublock Origin.

@breadmoth

I went to the Minds site and it renders properly for me. Of course, since I don't have an account, I can't log in.

I'm using 64 bit linux Pale Moon 27.7.2 running in 64 bit linux Mint 18.3 (Sylvia) Xfce.

this is what i get with ublock origin disabled.BTW i like the rotating globe effect.
I dont have an account so i could not log in.

Night Wing wrote:@breadmoth

I went to the Minds site and it renders properly for me. Of course, since I don't have an account, I can't log in.

I'm using 64 bit linux Pale Moon 27.7.2 running in 64 bit linux Mint 18.3 (Sylvia) Xfce.

FSCK ME, that was it. Checked Allow Pages to Choose Their Own fonts instead of my selection above
Now the page displays as it should, I guess the fonts I were defaulting to did not like it
Still I don't know what is wrong with those fonts, seems like standard fonts with no oddball encoding but apparently minds just doesn't like it.

breadmoth wrote: Still I don't know what is wrong with those fonts, seems like standard fonts with no oddball encoding but apparently minds just doesn't like it.

These are not normal fonts but icon fonts... so called Material Icons font:

https://google.github.io/material-design-icons/

Try to select and copy some of that icon and when you paste it you will see text, so icon font

Normally, you would only want to disallow web-specified fonts if you have special needs for it. Websites are in 95% or more of the cases designed to be using their supplied fonts, not system fonts.
This is also why allowing pages to use their own fonts is default in Pale Moon. Why did you change it?

Moonchild wrote:Normally, you would only want to disallow web-specified fonts if you have special needs for it. Websites are in 95% or more of the cases designed to be using their supplied fonts, not system fonts.
This is also why allowing pages to use their own fonts is default in Pale Moon. Why did you change it?

I guess because I was so used to the Serif fonts , even back in the days of Windows that the pages to me looks weird when allowing the fonts be chosen by the webpage itself. I can live with it though, and let PM allow the websites to override system fonts.

Moonchild wrote:Normally, you would only want to disallow web-specified fonts if you have special needs for it. Websites are in 95% or more of the cases designed to be using their supplied fonts, not system fonts.
This is also why allowing pages to use their own fonts is default in Pale Moon. Why did you change it?

The other side of the argument is speed, privacy, security (mostly Windows), and accessability issues. See

• https://github.com/wet-boew/wet-boew/issues/8024
• https://collinmbarrett.com/block-web-fonts/
• https://thenextweb.com/security/2017/02/21/chrome-missing-font-hack-malware/

As far as security goes, I never assume "it can't happen here". In many cases, the website is (ab)using one or two cutsie unicode characters to function as images/icons, instead of using real images/icons.

Walter Dnes wrote:

Moonchild wrote:Normally, you would only want to disallow web-specified fonts if you have special needs for it. Websites are in 95% or more of the cases designed to be using their supplied fonts, not system fonts.
This is also why allowing pages to use their own fonts is default in Pale Moon. Why did you change it?

The other side of the argument is speed, privacy, security (mostly Windows), and accessability issues. See

• https://github.com/wet-boew/wet-boew/issues/8024
• https://collinmbarrett.com/block-web-fonts/
• https://thenextweb.com/security/2017/02/21/chrome-missing-font-hack-malware/

As far as security goes, I never assume "it can't happen here". In many cases, the website is (ab)using one or two cutsie unicode characters to function as images/icons, instead of using real images/icons.

That was originally why I disallowed websites overriding my system fonts - and serif looks just fine on a page. If PM had an option to only allow minds to override my system fonts, and I can use my system fonts for any other page, I guess that would be fine, but yea I wish the folks at minds would find other ways of making their site display properly without the need to override my system fonts.

Ublock Origin has the option to block all font downloads, but then you can allow them on a site by site basis. It's that "A" in the lower right corner of its quick settings panel. I turn fonts on if the "tofu" on a page gets too annoying.

stevepusser wrote:Ublock Origin has the option to block all font downloads, but then you can allow them on a site by site basis. It's that "A" in the lower right corner of its quick settings panel. I turn fonts on if the "tofu" on a page gets too annoying.

Which A? Even Ublock Origin does not show that A (nor other font images it uses) if you have "Allow Pages to Choose Their Own fonts" disabled.

That is funny thing since it can block other sites from font download, but doesn't block itself from font download

Probably that option "Allow pages to choose their own fonts, instead of my selections above" should be more descriptive "Allow pages (and Add-ons) to choose their own fonts, instead of my selections above"

I find this setting useful for having better looking (more crisp) fonts in PM on Linux. Often the site provided fonts don’t render well on Linux.

The occasional glitch is to be expected, but better looking fonts are worth it IMO. What constitutes a better looking font is subjective and also depends on your display/resolution etc. I find this setting valuable and have used it for years.

FWIW, I just went there & saw your glitch. I allowed all scripts, did not download any fonts (I almost never do - anybody that makes a website dependent on specific fonts doesn't deserve traffic IMO). I zoomed out a bit & it went away. After that I couldn't get it to do it again, no matter how I zoomed. So, for me, that particular glitch was trivially easy to deal with. But Minds, oh boy, I have an account but you need to study a manual to get much out of the place. It is heavy, bogs my system down & generally not very easy to use. I'll keep trying because I like what they are doing & there are some creators there that I like that aren't on bitchute. But truthfully, of all those kinds of sites, Grandma Youtube included, Bitchute is the only one that actually works well for me.

I think we just need a distinction between first and third party fonts.. I always serve fonts my self because I want a specific look to text and they are part of the design.

New Tobin Paradigm wrote:I think we just need a distinction between first and third party fonts.. I always serve fonts my self because I want a specific look to text and they are part of the design.

It won't help because many, many websites will use fonts supplied by a font forge and often downloaded from a CDN for both bandwidth and licensing reasons. For the browser, those will be third-party, but still as must part of the design as first-party-self-hosted fonts.