Suggestion regarding addons,

[frostknight]

I found that there is currently a firefox addon called Ruffle. I wondered if anyone here is skilled enough to make a XUL version of that.

Its a way to use flash games without adobe flash.

I don't know if this interests anyone, but thought I would share the info here.

[Moonchild]

Why use an incomplete html5 attempt at emulating flash when we support the flash plugin?
Just install the flash player plugin.

[suzyne]

Why use an incomplete html5 attempt at emulating flash when we support the flash plugin?
Just install the flash player plugin.

I get that reasoning. But I think an extension like Ruffle has a place, even if right now it is not perfect. (I don't know good or poor it is because I don't actually use it!)

There may be a day when an update means that the Flash Player stops working on some computer operating systems? And if that happens having a JavaScript implementation of Flash will be a good thing.

Using Ruffle now (and reporting bugs) could be seen as an investment in the future!

[frostknight]

Why use an incomplete html5 attempt at emulating flash when we support the flash plugin?
Just install the flash player plugin.

There is also lightspark being worked on too I looked.

When they are at feature parity, or close to it, I recommend supporting them/or having someone make an xul version.

They are incomplete for now, I tried lightspark and it didn't load antbuster classic. Anywho, I will let you know if it ever works properly.

[andyprough]

Why use an incomplete html5 attempt at emulating flash when we support the flash plugin?
Just install the flash player plugin.

Flash is non-free. Might not matter to you, but it matters an awful lot to @frostknight, who is a big part of several free software communities. He's heavily involved in Hyperbola GNU/Linux and Hyperbola BSD, which are the most free of all modern desktop OS's as far as I can tell.

[frostknight]

Just install the flash player plugin.

Flash is non-free. Might not matter to you, but it matters an awful lot to @frostknight, who is a big part of several free software communities. He's heavily involved in Hyperbola GNU/Linux and Hyperbola BSD, which are the most free of all modern desktop OS's as far as I can tell.

Also, libre software is usually more secure as well. Mostly because people are constantly updating it usually and/or no backdoors.

[moonbat]

Flash fell out of common use long ago - the only use case for it today are old sites with Flash animations and games for which there are emulation attempts like Ruffle for other browser users who can't run the original plugin.
Malware peddlers have moved onto other exploitable software to ply their trade; remember they are opportunistic and thus depend on exploiting what's widely used, i.e. Chrome. Flash used to be that but not any longer, and no one is wasting their time building an exploit on the off chance that a Pale Moon user (a micro minority) with Flash installed (even smaller minority) is going to show up on their website to get pwned.

[Moonchild]

Flash is non-free.

Sorry, but if I have to choose between a gratis-but-nonfree solution that works for content that is by definition retro/nostalgic and no longer actively developed, or a libre solution that is based on reverse-engineering that simply fails a good percentage of the time, then I choose the former, and I think any average user would as well.
We need tools that work, not tools that do a poor job but have a preferred philosophy behind them. None of the Flash alternatives have delivered in the many years they have been in development, and without Adobe actually open-sourcing their Flash player code, I don't think they ever will. It's just the reality of protected IP in software. (I know first hand about that in a different context. Ask me if you really want to know)

As for the sec angle: we ask permission before enabling Flash content by default. Getting pwned is very unlikely unless there's a good amount of social engineering and PEBCAK involved.

[UCyborg]

I find it annoying that the sites keep forcing their emulators. Did Ruffle ever work in Pale Moon?

https://www.y8.com/

This site forces it, doesn't work in Pale Moon. Works in Firefox without any extension. This site used to serve Flash content normally so it could be loaded by the plugin. No more.

[Moonchild]

I find it annoying that the sites keep forcing their emulators.

Yeah there's no reason to force it if browsers support the native plugin. But of course Ruffle (and I guess any other emulator) wants it that way because they want to push their own thing to the forefront. I don't think they offer an out-of-the-box use of native plugin embeds in their instructions how to set it up.
You can ask the server admins to check for plugin support and use that, and only if no plugin API is found, use Ruffle/other emulator.

[suzyne]

I think any average user would as well.

But that's the thing. Pale Moon users are far from average! Hence, the interest in Ruffle or other alternatives to the official Flash player.

Sure, philosophy and principles may result in a less than perfect technical solution that doesn't work in all cases, but hey I use Pale Moon and so something about pots and kettles.

[andyprough]

Flash is non-free.

Sorry, but if I have to choose between a gratis-but-nonfree solution that works for content that is by definition retro/nostalgic and no longer actively developed, or a libre solution that is based on reverse-engineering that simply fails a good percentage of the time, then I choose the former, and I think any average user would as well.

I did not say a word about your choices (pretty obvious since you make it clear you use windows) or about security. I just mentioned that free software licensing is crucially important to @frostknight.

This is obviously not a free software zealot community like some others that @frostknight and I frequent, so he and I are well aware that we're not going to be able to do much proselytizing here, just trying to get the most we can out of Pale Moon on our OS's of choice. It's a browser that works extraordinarily well on some free software OS's where other browsers will not run at all.

[moonbat]

Off-topic:
Free software zealotry often comes at the expense of usability and user friendliness (if they even care to consider these factors for a non neckbeard audience). It's why Linux never made inroads in the desktop space until Windows itself started to suck big time and became actively user hostile after version 8. I never bothered with desktop Linux other than a curiosity (I've used RHEL, SUSE and a few other distros at work) and took the plunge only after seeing how Windows 10 was sluggish as hell on an old laptop that I was forced to switch to. Now with KDE Neon on a better one, there's no going back for me.

[Moonchild]

I did not say a word about your choices

I was providing my opinion on the situation, not putting words in your mouth. But read it as you wish, I guess.

[andyprough]

I did not say a word about your choices

I was providing my opinion on the situation, not putting words in your mouth. But read it as you wish, I guess.

Ah I see. You started your comment "Sorry, but if I have to choose ...", as if in response to me, so I figured maybe I should clear up what I was saying. Sounds like we both understood the other one though, so all good.

It's good to talk these things through very thoroughly though, you've made some comments here that give new insight into your thinking. I appreciate how your stance is "best tool for the job", since you have important work to get done and can't be held up by free software licensing zealotry like @frostknight and to a lesser extent like me. And you understand security in ways that I would be unable to grok.

Also, I presume that you've looked at a lot of source code that the rest of us will never see including a lot of proprietary source code, that you understand how it works or doesn't work, and that you are probably of the opinion that software licensing concerns are overblown. Which is also fair.

What's interesting though is that you use an open model for developing Pale Moon, which I assume you do not have to do. So there must still be many advantages to the open model. In fact, you make the code and the build process more open and accessible than the software of many of the most zealous free software advocates. Which is intriguing. You've got a bit of an apparent dichotomy between personal preference and public action. All to my benefit, so I'm not one to complain.

[UCyborg]

But that's the thing. Pale Moon users are far from average! Hence, the interest in Ruffle or other alternatives to the official Flash player.

Sure, philosophy and principles may result in a less than perfect technical solution that doesn't work in all cases, but hey I use Pale Moon and so something about pots and kettles.

Off-topic:
One thing worth mentioning is that Pale Moon continues Firefox's legacy. Firefox was once the go-to web browser while Linux distros and similar operating systems were never popular in the first place for obvious reasons.

I never liked desktop Linux as daily driver. I guess I just don't like the way things are done in general. I never had graphics working properly there. fglrx was the most atrocious driver I ever dealt with. With NVIDIA, problems were just in other places. I'm bothered by things like font rendering and mouse feel. My preferred software either isn't ported to Linux or if it is, in some cases doesn't quite work/feel as expected.

I know my way around Windows, Task Scheduler, services' permissions, System Infomer etc. It's not perfect, Win10 needed quite some tweaking, but by version 1809, it was the most dependable version I ever used. I can get by Win11, still runs the software as usual, though you would think Win8's start screen was the worst (was very easy to undo with ClassicShell), well in Win11 they managed to radically dumb down the taskbar, even in restorable old taskbar implementation in Win11 23H2 by ExplorerPatcher, you can't drop files to programs' buttons. Crazy!

This song is still relevant: Every OS sucks

[frostknight]

Sorry, but if I have to choose between a gratis-but-nonfree solution that works for content that is by definition retro/nostalgic and no longer actively developed, or a libre solution that is based on reverse-engineering that simply fails a good percentage of the time, then I choose the former, and I think any average user would as well.

I understand that is your viewpoint, I didn't expect much else.

We need tools that work, not tools that do a poor job but have a preferred philosophy behind them. None of the Flash alternatives have delivered in the many years they have been in development, and without Adobe actually open-sourcing their Flash player code, I don't think they ever will. It's just the reality of protected IP in software. (I know first hand about that in a different context. Ask me if you really want to know)

I would have agreed with you given what i know about other reverse engineering efforts such as intel me and how hard that is to delete, etc...

it a different thing, but my point is, if people can disable or delete that firmware in such hardware which was mega hard to do, I don't see why flash can't be made to work with only libre software. You would call it open source of course.

flash also isn't changing, so there is plenty of time to make it work without libre software anyhow.

As well as its not a moving target.

Don't you think that matters?

[UCyborg]

Flash fell out of common use long ago - the only use case for it today are old sites with Flash animations and games for which there are emulation attempts like Ruffle for other browser users who can't run the original plugin.
Malware peddlers have moved onto other exploitable software to ply their trade; remember they are opportunistic and thus depend on exploiting what's widely used, i.e. Chrome. Flash used to be that but not any longer, and no one is wasting their time building an exploit on the off chance that a Pale Moon user (a micro minority) with Flash installed (even smaller minority) is going to show up on their website to get pwned.

Adobe keeps patching Flash for Chinese, regular mortals can get unrestricted version here.

Some more information: https://github.com/darktohka/FlashPatch

[suzyne]

Adobe keeps patching Flash for Chinese, regular mortals can get unrestricted version here.

Nice. Pale Moon even gets a mention in the readme.

Clipboard_07-06-2025_01.png

[Moonchild]

I strongly advise NOT to use the mainland-China-only version of Flash Player. It does not include any functional changes from the last non-timebombed version released by Adobe, and you are avoiding the following serious pitfall:

While Adobe has completely stopped updating the global version of Adobe Flash Player, they are still maintaining a special version of Adobe Flash for Mainland China only. This version is completely compatible with the global version of Flash, but contains a non-closable process, known as the "Flash Helper Service", that collects private information and pops up advertisement window contents.

"maintaining" a special version just means keeping their private data collection updated. You are receiving no other benefits from "bigger version number better" feelings, here.