Weather.com not working under Firefox 45.0.1

[Rav]

Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no longer
under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running under
Windows 7. Thanks for any help.

[Delrio]

Works fine with all the following browsers:

Palemoon 26.1.1 x64
Chrome 49.0.2623.87 m (64bit)
IE 11.1001.14291.0
Edge 34.14291.1001.0

So you know what to do..... dump that Firefox browser for something that
works.

[Keith Nuttle]

For what it is worth I am running Firefox 45.0.1 on Windows 8.1 64 bit,
and just accessed Weather.com. I was ablel to open all of the tabs and
they all worked as they should. Since I can not see the problem I can
not help.

[A]

Um, it works just fine with Firefox so you can just stop you're
trolling. I suspect the problem is not Firefox but something like an add
on or plug in.

--
A

[Rav]

(I know your trolling comment wasn't referring to me, but at any rate.)
As I previously mentioned, the problem still occurs in safe mode
(add-ons are disabled). Additionally, most of my plug-ins are set to
"ask to activate" (and they were not activated), and the three plug-ins
I normally have set to "always activate" I had set to "never activate"
to see if that was the problem, and that made no difference either. So
neither add-ons nor plug-ins are the issue. From the other responses it
sounds like it's "just" me having the problem, but I can't figure out
what the problem is. Other than upgrading from 45.0.0 to 45.0.1, no
other changes were made from when it used to work (a few days ago) until
now. Oh well.

[A]

I suspect your profile is corrupt somehow. I had that happen to me and
no matter what I did, FF stayed messed up. So, I installed FF 64 bit and
it imported everything and is working like a charm.

--
A

[Mayayana]

This doesn't exactly answer your question, but
you can get it straight from the horse's mouth
without the commercialism and without script
required:

http://www.weather.gov/

Once you enter a ZIP code and get a forecast, you
can then use that URL in the future. There are also
local and regional radar maps. For instance, here's the
northeast map:

http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/northeast_loop.php

If you don't mind enabling script you can have a
looping version of that. (Personally I'm happy
just knowing how far away the rain is. :)

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.776.1458829207...@lists.mozilla.org>,

There's a thread in the SeaMonkey group/list you might want to follow,
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.support.seamonkey/JY-fXrmN8LE>.
The OP there reports that enabling geolocation ("Location-Aware
Browsing") in SM but then not sending location info to weather.com
works for him. <https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/geolocation/>

[Delrio]

You're not the only one having problem. I also have FF 45.0.1 x64
installed but not my default browser and the site doesn't work properly.

[Delrio]

To all the Mozilla fanbois:

This is not trolling, this is stating a fact. When a site works properly
in the "not quite ready for prime time Win10 Edge" then that doesn't say
much about Firefox.
Ever since the introduction of the Autralis debacle every new version of
Firefox gets worst with sites not working properly.

[Keith Nuttle]

On 3/24/2016 12:34 PM, Rav wrote:
> Additionally, most of my plug-ins are set to
> "ask to activate" (and they were not activated), and the three plug-ins
> I normally have set to "always activate" I had set to "never activate"
> to see if that was the problem, and that made no difference either. So
> neither add-ons nor plug-ins are the issue. From the other responses it
> sounds like it's "just" me having the problem, but I can't figure out
> what the problem is. Other than upgrading from 45.0.0 to 45.0.1, no
> other changes were made from when it used to work (a few days ago) until
> now. Oh well.

I beleive that Weather.com uses Adobe flash, so if you have Adobe flash
disabled then that may be your problem.

I know www.wunderground.com uses Adobe flash.

Also weather.com uses a secure site "https", have you changed your
security settings so that Weather.com can not get the proper security
clearance form you browser.

As said many times before Firefox is very strict on the internet protocols.

[Rav]

Thanks for the response. Adobe Flash is (and has been) enabled for
weather.com. And I haven't changed any security settings for that or
any other site. But see my response to A on corrupt profile.

[Rav]

Aha! That does seem to have something to do with the problem. I
created a test new profile and weather.com works there. Is there some
file(s) within my existing profile that could be the problem, which can
be deleted and they'll be automatically recreated? Otherwise, I don't
know how to import from one profile to another. I've spent years
setting this one up and don't want to lose things. Thanks.

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.794.1458838697...@lists.mozilla.org>,

Delrio <Del...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> This is not trolling, this is stating a fact. When a site works
> properly in the "not quite ready for prime time Win10 Edge" then that
> doesn't say much about Firefox.

You've confused your opinion with fact, and you're trolling.

> Ever since the introduction of the Autralis debacle every new version
> of Firefox gets worst with sites not working properly.

This is unrelated to Australis, and you're trolling.

You've done nothing toward solving the OP's problem; you're *only*
trolling.

[crossposted, followup set to mozilla.general]

[Ant]

I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my other
computer's SeaMonkey. :D

Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D
--
"When the water rises the fish eat the ants, when the water falls the
ants eat the fish." --Thai Proverb
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see
this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) Chop ANT from its address if e-mailing privately.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

[Nobody]

That's weather.GOV... OP is asking about weather.COM.

And the .com site does not work for me.... Win 10 64-bit... Ffox
45.0.1 64-bit, so Rav isn't the only one. As other sites requiring
Flash are working fine, I'm not inclined to go hunting for the reaaon
on a site I don't use.

About 80% of the home page is missing/just masses of grey, and all
missing elements are Adobe Flash content.

Adobe just updated for me three days ago... version 21.0.0.182

[Nobody]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 13:31:16 -0700, Ant <a...@zimage.comANT> wrote:

>On 3/24/2016 7:19 AM, Rav wrote:
>> Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
>> Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
>> be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
>> doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no longer
>> under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running under
>> Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
>
>I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
>after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
>web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my other
>computer's SeaMonkey. :D
>
>Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D

Yep... didn't see your post till I'd posted my earlier reply to
Mayayana...

<geo.emabled> to true, and it works fine.

[Delrio]

Flash is now at 21.0.0.197

https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/distribution3.html

http://preview.tinyurl.com/72las6x

[Delrio]

....and there goes your privacy.

[Rav]

On 3/24/2016 4:31 PM, Ant wrote:
> On 3/24/2016 7:19 AM, Rav wrote:
>> Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
>> Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
>> be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
>> doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no longer
>> under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running under
>> Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
>
> I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
> after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
> web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my other
> computer's SeaMonkey. :D
>
> Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D

Yes, setting geo.enabled to true also makes it start working for me.
And that's why it worked when I created a new test profile earlier -- a
brand-new profile has geo.enabled set to true by default. It looks like
weather.com must have just started requiring geolocation, perhaps
unintentionally, to be enabled in order to work /at all/. But as much
as I am used to using weather.com and wish to keep using it, I'm not
going to keep geolocation enabled just so I can use it. If weather.com
fixes this issue, I'll use it. My problem is "solved," at least in as
much as I now know what the problem is.

[Rav]

On 3/24/2016 4:31 PM, Ant wrote:

> On 3/24/2016 7:19 AM, Rav wrote:
>> Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
>> Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
>> be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
>> doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no longer
>> under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running under
>> Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
>
> I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
> after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
> web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my other
> computer's SeaMonkey. :D
>
> Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D

After temporarily setting geo.enabled to true just so I could load
weather.com, I went to their "Support and feedback" link at the bottom
of their main page and reported this issue. I hope some others will do
the same so that hopefully they will fix the problem with their web site.

[Nobody]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 19:06:36 -0400, Delrio <Del...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

You must be of The Red Under Every Bed persuasion.

So I go <true>... and wunderbar, I'm supposedly a resident of
Washington, DC as far as weather.com is concerned.

The 'C' of DC is the only correct character. I have to agree with
comments above... you're trolling.

[A]

The first time this happened, I used Chrome to import everything from FF
and tested it to make sure passwords, etc. were saved and they were but
I had two sets of bookmarks. I uninstalled FF 32, downloaded FF 64 and
imported everything from Chrome including both sets of bookmarks. I
opened the bookmarks manager and nuked all the Chrome bookmarks and cut
and pasted the FF bookmarks where the Chrome one were and all was well,
FF opened quickly. On another computer with the same messed up profile,
I downloaded FF 64 and it automagically imported everything from 32 and
works perfectly.

--
A

[Ant]

On 3/24/2016 3:38 PM, Nobody wrote:

>>> Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
>>> Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
>>> be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
>>> doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no longer
>>> under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running under
>>> Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
>>
>> I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
>> after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
>> web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my other
>> computer's SeaMonkey. :D
>>
>> Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D
>
> Yep... didn't see your post till I'd posted my earlier reply to
> Mayayana...

It's OK. ;)

> <geo.emabled> to true, and it works fine.

I find it interesting that if you put back to false value and force a
re(load/fresh), it will be OK for a little bit but the issue returns
later. Argh.
--
"A 'practical joker' deserves applause for his wit according to its
quality. Bastinado is about right. For exceptional wit one might grant
keelhauling. But staking him out on an anthill should be reserved for
the very wittiest." --Lazarus Long

[Ant]

Same here. Please do share if they actually answer and/or see any fixes!
I am keeping my false value for geo location. None of these web sites
need to know my geo location. :P
--
"While an ant was wandering under the shade of the tree of Phæton, a
drop of amber enveloped the tiny insect; thus she, who in life was
disregarded, became precious by death." --Martial, Epigrams (c. 80-104
AD), Book VI, Epistle 15.

[VanguardLH]

I'm using FF 45.0.1 and also see the page does not render correctly.
Looks like they use a ton of Javascript some of which is using Canvas
some which points to off-domain resources. I restarted FF in its safe
mode to eliminate the CanvasBlocker or any other add-on causing the
problem. Still only got part of the web page.

I hit F12 and clicked on the Console tab and noticed there is an error
about the site trying to use geolocation (where the client provides for
geo data via getHTML5Location(), not the site using IP geolocation). I
have that disabled in Firefox. There is another error (only remember
seeing something about "undefined" for several functions). In FF safe
mode, that wouldn't be due to the adblocker (uBlock Origin) preventing
the site from accessing a resource since in FF safe mode that add-on
isn't loaded. There is also a warning that the site is referencing
js-sec.indexww.com which is using a weak SHA-1 certificate. The same
errors and warning showed in in the console when I restarted FF in
normal mode (all add-ons loaded) and visited weather.com (except the
weak cert warning disappeared because the adblocker prevented
weather.com from accessing resources from that off-domain site).

I temporarily disable my anti-virus software and refreshed the web page
but still only part of it got retrieved. I think the site is fucked.
That navbar still works ... sort of. Click on "Forecasts" and then
"Today's Forecast". I get the error page saying "Oh no! The page you
are looking for does not exist. Go back, friend, go back!". This is
because the navigation links between pages is broken and their logic
default to pointing at their local "\page-not-found" notification page.
Their "National Forecasts" navbar link works to correctly navigate to
that page "forecast/news/national-forecast-20141009" but that page still
has resource problems (can't get to the resources needed to dynamically
construct that page, like the wxnode_video_player).

Shit happens and you have to wait to see the the site admins gets around
to flushing the turds. I've seen that when a site migrates to a new
layout but has not yet cleared their web server of the old pages or the
links in the new pages did not get updated to point at the other new
pages (they point at old pages that aren't there anymore or are now
incomplete).

weather.com paints okay (but slow) when I use Internet Explorer 11. So
I started to ponder if that site is stupidly using the User Agent header
to determine what client is visiting their site (and then altering what
HTML code is used to handle that client). I changed the UA string in
Firefox (using the User Agent Switcher add-on with its miniscule
pre-defined set of UA string only for IE6, 7, and 8) to pretend that I
was using IE8. Nope, weather.com still wouldn't paint correctly.

Although it comes with a miniscule set of UA strings from which to
select, I installed the User Agent Switcher add-on. It only comes with
a short list of IE strings: IE6, 7, and 8. I changed to IE8 as to what
FF sends as its UA header and tested by visiting useragentstring.com.
Yep, I'm reported as an IE8 client. Still weather.com wouldn't work
when using FF 45.0.1 pretending to be IE8.

Although you would not expect a web site to catastrophically fail if you
configured your client to NOT voluntarily sent geolocation data, this
site will. I had geo.enabled set to False because I don't want to have
my client send that info. If a site wants to know where I am, let them
use an IP address lookup table from a geolocation database. Yet when I
*enable geolocation in Firefox* (geo.enabled = true) then weather.com
will paint okay. This comes back to the error that I noted in the
console about that site erroring when trying to use Javascript to get my
client (Firefox) to divulge my geolocation. With geo.enabled = true, I
get a popup in Firefox asking if I want to share my geolocation with the
site. I just X'ed out of the popup alert and then the site painted
okay. So the site DEMANDS that the client have geolocation functions
enabled for use by their Javascript even if you elect to not give it to
them. They are too stupid to check for an error status on a function to
determine that the client does not support will has disabled its
geolocation function.

So decide if you want to continue visiting a site so poorly coded that
its Javascript pukes because it assume the *client's* geolocation
function is available. You can leave geo.enabled = false to eliminate
one method of tracking you and most sites that try to use it in their
Javascript will simply fail and adopt to using other code or simply skip
past the error for return status. Not this site. If they detect you
have a web browser that has a geolocation feature, they MUST have it
enabled (rather than code for a function's error status).

For me, I will continue using Firefox with geo.enabled = false. I
stopped using weather.com a long time ago and switched to
accuweather.com where there is no problem visiting that site with a web
browser capable of geolocation but having it disabled.

geo.enabled = true (default) - Firefox will send geolocation data to a
site that requests it via Javascript.

geo.enabled = false - Firefox will error on Javascript function calls to
the geo API. Site needs to have error recovery in their page code
(e.g., simply check for return status when trying to use the Javascript
function).

weather.com does NOT provide graceful error recovery for a client they
know supports geolocation but where it is disabled in the client.

[Rav]

On 3/25/2016 1:20 AM, Ant wrote:
> On 3/24/2016 4:59 PM, Rav wrote:
>
>>>> Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
>>>> Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
>>>> be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
>>>> doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no
>>>> longer
>>>> under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running
>>>> under
>>>> Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
>>>
>>> I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
>>> after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
>>> web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my other
>>> computer's SeaMonkey. :D
>>>
>>> Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D
>>
>> After temporarily setting geo.enabled to true just so I could load
>> weather.com, I went to their "Support and feedback" link at the bottom
>> of their main page and reported this issue. I hope some others will do
>> the same so that hopefully they will fix the problem with their web site.
>
> Same here. Please do share if they actually answer and/or see any fixes!
> I am keeping my false value for geo location. None of these web sites
> need to know my geo location. :P

Thanks. Will do (no answer yet, just an auto-reply thanking me for my
submission and that they'll respond "as soon as possible" (hmmm, we'll see).

[Mayayana]

| Although you would not expect a web site to catastrophically fail if you
| configured your client to NOT voluntarily sent geolocation data, this
| site will. I had geo.enabled set to False

One also wouldn't expect it to fail with no info.

I was under the impression that disabled was the
default. In any case, it's not even relevant unless
you're on a phone or using public wireless access
that can be tracked. For most people using computers,
geolocation has no way to function. (I don't even
have a wireless computer running in the house. We
have three. All plugged in directly.)

I'm curious why so many people like the heavily
commercial weather.com and don't use the simple
but highly functional weather.gov. Is it extras,
like golf course or fishing reports?

[Rav]

On 3/25/2016 11:41 AM, Mayayana wrote:
> <Snip>

>
> I'm curious why so many people like the heavily
> commercial weather.com and don't use the simple
> but highly functional weather.gov. Is it extras,
> like golf course or fishing reports?
>
>

I find weather.com very easy to use. I have it customized for where I
live. Just by entering my zip code, I get an easy to use menu where I
can pick from today, hourly, 10 day, monthly, etc. It displays the info
in a way that I find easy to see. I tried weather.gov, and entered my
zip code there, and I don't see any similar menu items, just a bunch of
stuff I'm not interested in. I don't see the info I want in the way
that I like it presented. It's quite easy to ignore the ads, and I use
Flashblock. It's just a matter of personal preference. I /do,/
however, use radar.weather.gov when I want to see NOAA animated radar (I
have it bookmarked to show a radar loop of my region).

[WaltS48]

I have wunderground.com (home page) and weather.com, weather.gov,
intellicast.com and accuweather.com bookmarked.

Weather Underground because it shows me current weather, history, 10 day
forecast and radar all without needing to scroll. The others require
more work.

--
*Ubuntu 15.10*
*It's March! Go Gonzaga! Go Villanova!*
Visit Pittsburgh <http://www.visitpittsburgh.com/>
Coexist · Understanding Across Divides <https://www.coexist.org/>

[EE]

Why would a weather forecasting site need to know the exact spot where
you are sitting? Your IP number tells them what city you are in. That
is close enough.

[Chris Ilias]

On 2016-03-24 12:57 PM, Delrio wrote:

> To all the Mozilla fanbois:
>
> This is not trolling, this is stating a fact. When a site works properly
> in the "not quite ready for prime time Win10 Edge" then that doesn't say
> much about Firefox.

- The person might have an extension installed that is causing the problem.

- The site might require a plugin, and the version of that plugin the
person has installed might be out of date.

- There might be a setting the person has enabled, which he/she did not
enable in other browsers.


Secondly, this forum is for helping people in their use of Firefox. The
point is to help get his problem solved, so he can continue to the use
the *browser he wants to use* without problems. It's different if the
feature-set, interface, or company principles are a better match for the
user, but not if one webpage is not rendering properly.


If you'd like to reply to this message, please email me with a valid
return address, thanks.

--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
Mailing list/Newsgroup moderator

[Dave Pyles]

For what ti's worth, my IP address tells sites that I an in the middle
of Vermont when I'm actually in New Hampshire, about 75 miles away.
Dave Pyles

[Mayayana]

| Why would a weather forecasting site need to know the exact spot where
| you are sitting? Your IP number tells them what city you are in. That
| is close enough.
|

I'd guess that the geo founctionality, in
general, is aimed at showing ads on phones.
At some point they may be able to show
you a Starbucks ad or coupon while you're
walking past the store. Or they could sell
the data to other ad purveyors. The
geolocation functionality is coming from
Google, so you're giving Google research
data, and/or the weather site might send
the data to Google to optimize ad targetting
and thereby get paid more per ad.

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.865.1458936742...@lists.mozilla.org>,

"Mayayana" <maya...@invalid.nospam> wrote:

> The geolocation functionality is coming from
> Google, so you're giving Google research
> data,

You don't have to. If you want to switch from Google to Mozilla
Location Services, change geo.wifi.uri to
"https://location.services.mozilla.com/v1/geolocate?key=%MOZILLA_API_KEY%".
I don't know why MLS is not the default for desktop Firefox.

[VanguardLH]

Mayayana wrote:

>| Although you would not expect a web site to catastrophically fail if you
>| configured your client to NOT voluntarily sent geolocation data, this
>| site will. I had geo.enabled set to False
>
> One also wouldn't expect it to fail with no info.
>
> I was under the impression that disabled was the
> default. In any case, it's not even relevant unless
> you're on a phone or using public wireless access
> that can be tracked. For most people using computers,
> geolocation has no way to function. (I don't even
> have a wireless computer running in the house. We
> have three. All plugged in directly.)

On (true) is the default for the geo.enabled setting. After all, the
geolocation feature is not exposed in the config UI (options) of
Firefox. Unlike Google Chrome that exposes that setting, you have to
dig into about:config in Firefox. So Mozilla enabled this feature by
default when they added it hence all the online articles on how to
disable this feature. Even Mozilla's article (below) tells you how to
disable the geolocation feature. You don't have to disable something
that was disabled by default.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/geolocation/

It is still unclear just how geolocation is established unless Firefox
is using those wifi hotspots to perform its own geolocation lookup
should it not be able to do so from the same host on which Firefox is
running. What info is getting collected from other wifi hotspots?
Seems like some wifi mapping is going on.

I would always be denying that requested info. Let them do it the old
fashioned way: IP address geolocation lookup. Setting geo.enabled to
false means me not getting bothered with popups to which I would always
select to deny voluntarily giving any site my geo data. With it
disabled, I'm not bothered with prompts. Despite Mozilla's claim
regarding privacy, answering prompts is not how to protect privacy.

Since one of the data points included in the geo data delivered by
Firefox (or any geo-aware client) is the local IP address, I have to
wonder what gets reported to a geo-aware site for someone visiting there
using Tor or an anonymizing proxy. Seems client-offered geo data would
obviate the privacy the Tor and anonymizing proxies afford. The user
goes through the hassle of using an unreliable mesh network of slower
nodes to hide their IP address only to have it divulged by the client
when connecting to a geo-aware site.

What if you use a public proxy to get around some regionally restricted
content? You're told at a site that you cannot get to some content
because you are outside their "broadcast region". I ran into that with
the BBC site. I could use a public proxy located inside their region to
get at the content that would otherwise be blocked.

Also, just which IP address could Firefox deliver to a web site? How
would Firefox know what is the WAN-side IP address (Internet-facing
side) of your NAT router? Sending a site an intranet IP address, like
192.168.0.100 or 10.x.x.x, seems pointless to a site that wants to know
where you are, not that your client is running in an intranet inside a
router and has a private IP address. Besides the privacy issue with
client's doling out geo data to sites, I wonder about companies that
would prefer outsides to NOT be able to map the intranet inside a
corporation's network.

While the article mentions gathering info from nearby wireless access
points (useless for those of use with wired home PCs) and the host's IP
address, they also mention use of "service providers" for location data.
Sounds like an IP geolocation lookup, to me, performed by the client
rather than having the server do that lookup. In fact, later they
mention "Google Location Services". So more data harvesting by Google
as to where are the visitors to which web sites.

The client-provided geo data also included a Google-generated
identifier. Remember the stink when users found out that Google Chrome
came with a client ID that could be used to track visitors at sites?
Variants of Chromium (well, of Chrome) removed that client ID function
to be "more secure" versions of Google Chrome. So now Firefox has added
it back so you can be tracked. Oh yes, sites never share visitor info,
so you could never be tracked by cooperative or associated web sites, uh
huh, sure. Two weeks is a hell of a long time to have a client ID that
can track your web navigation.

Client-provide geo data is not for the benefit of the user. It is
solely for the benefit of the other endpoint to which the client
connects. It seems to circumvent some of the privacy measures that
users employ to hide their location and/or their IP address. A site
doesn't have to rely on an IP lookup database to find its geolocation.
Now the client voluntarily pukes out that info. And the user gets
assigned a 2-week client ID, to boot, to track their web navigation.

Considering the *loss* of privacy by having the client provide a site
with geolocation data, sure looks like this was Google's influence again
on Mozilla as to another "feature" to the client.

[Ant]

....

>>>> I figured it out now. Web browser's about:config's geo.enabled (false)
>>>> after noticing my PrefBar's had this checked on the working weather.com
>>>> web site. I was able to reproduce the issue in both Firefox and my
>>>> other
>>>> computer's SeaMonkey. :D
>>>>
>>>> Now, let's go tell weather.com about it! :D
>>>
>>> After temporarily setting geo.enabled to true just so I could load
>>> weather.com, I went to their "Support and feedback" link at the bottom
>>> of their main page and reported this issue. I hope some others will do
>>> the same so that hopefully they will fix the problem with their web
>>> site.
>>
>> Same here. Please do share if they actually answer and/or see any fixes!
>> I am keeping my false value for geo location. None of these web sites
>> need to know my geo location. :P
>
> Thanks. Will do (no answer yet, just an auto-reply thanking me for my
> submission and that they'll respond "as soon as possible" (hmmm, we'll
> see).

Same results here. :( I'll be surprised if they answer and fix it. :P I
wonder if we're the only two who e-mailed TWC. :/
--
"It is not enough to be industrious; so are the ants. What are you
industrious about?" --Henry David Thoreau

[WaltS48]

Sorry, I haven't been following this thread.

You went to the Weather Channel site and got the "Would you like to
share your location with this site?" message, clicked the drop down
arrow next to "Share Location", clicked "Never Share Location" and keep
getting asked or what?

I clicked never share, restarted the browser, went to the site and
wasn't asked again.

The site displays just fine, using Firefox 45.0, 46.0b5 and 48.0a1.

Has anyone tried safe mode or a test profile?

--
*Linux Mint 17.3*
*It's March! Go Villanova!*

[Rav]

The gist is that if you have geo-location turned off in Firefox
(geo.enabled set to false in about:config), that when you go to
weather.com, most of the page fails to load. You see a bunch of grey
squares, and that's pretty much it. It appears that weather.com
REQUIRES geo-location to be turned on -- globally -- not just the
per-site "Share Location." I'm using FF 45.0.1 under Windows 7 64-bit.
Safe mode (and disabling all plug-ins) makes no difference, and the
only reason a test profile "works" is that in a new profile geo.enabled
defaults to true.

[Mr.E]

I have noted this exact behavior on 45.0 and 46b5.
I solved this by taking TWC off my preferred checking and using WU.
The availability of weather info sources is excellent and there is no
reason for me to prefer TWC for internet weather.
--
Mr.E

[WaltS48]

I see.

So, if a site doesn't ask if you want to "Share" your location, you are
still sharing your location with geo.enabled set to true?

Okay I changed the setting to false in a test profile and see the
problem. With geo enabled the page defaults to Washington DC for me,
which is about 247.3 miles away from where I live.

I'd say switch it back to true and use "Never Share" from the drop down
menu.

[WaltS48]

So did I after making a change that doesn't need to be made in about:config.

YMMV

[Mr.E]

On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 03:05:09 -0500, VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:

snip snip

AND we should all remember that TWC is now "An IBM Company".
--
Mr.E

[Mayayana]

| It is still unclear just how geolocation is established

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_GPS

I liked this link, which is not so official but far
more readable:

http://superuser.com/questions/274017/how-do-services-like-google-latitude-geolocate-my-laptop-perfectly-with-no-gps

So it's satellite, cell tower and wi-fi hotspots,
which have MAC adresses. It seems that any
computer with wifi turned on will provide data
from that to calculate position based on time
required to connect. That would be such a tiny
duration that I'm guessing the data access is
built into the wifi chip.

You raise some interesting questions. It seems
safe to say that if you're wifi capable then your
position may be getting reported to someone.
If websites can get that info from Firefox for free
they have no reason to use less accurate, probably
paid, IP database services. (One wonders why wifi
chips are made to release their data in the first
place. Perhaps it's unavoidable.)

I use a free component and database from
maxmind.com to translate IP addresses in the
server logs from my website. It seems to be
usually accurate within a town or two. They
advertise better accuracy with a paid version.
(For me the free version is fine. Mostly I'm just
curious at the level of country-of-origin.) That
kind of thing can be bypassed with Tor.

But presumably I could add a script snippet,
if I wanted to snoop, and figure out exactly where
people are. (Reason 9,274 not to enable javascript. :)
Here are the directions:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Geolocation/Using_geolocation

If you tap into Firefox's service you get lat/long
of a visitor, based on hardware output. Presumably
Mozilla.org is either sending the hardware data to
Google for processing or doing it themselves. In
either case it implies access to a vast database of
such things as wifi MAC location data, and vast
computing capacity. So presumably Mozilla is
getting directly involved in advertising here.

Once you have lat/long you can do all sorts of
things. I've already written a little program for using
Google Maps without going to Google via browser.
They provide all sorts of free APIs. With lat/long
from geolocation I could get a map, streetview and
altitude fairly easily. And that's just Google Maps API.

So that's a very credible scenario even for a small
website operator with little scripting experience. It's
very simple DOM stuff. Thus if you're on a plugged-in
laptop at home that nevertheless has wifi capability
turned on, the foreign website you want to access
can not only know you're in the US. They can have a
picture of your house in milliseconds, at no cost to
them. Another website can use that
data to show an ad for the grocery store on the next
block. The sky's the limit, so to speak. :)

For that matter, if you visit the website of the
grocery store on the next block they could resolve
the lat/long to figure out with reasonable certainty
which customer you are. As with maps and streetview,
Google and Mozilla are taking care of the hard part.

"Mr. Smith? We can't see you Mr. Smith. But that's
OK. You don't need to report in. We know you're hiding
behind the dining room wall, and that you're on your
laptop shopping at Amazon while you talk on your
cellphone."

I think another notable point here is the increasing
conflation of computers with computer phones. People
using computer phones are carrying tracking devices
and have a lot less control over data sent in and out.
But that's where the money is perceived to be, so the
use of actual computers becomes almost irrelevant
from the point of view of advertisers -- or any people of
the ilk prone to talking about "monetization". The same
thing seems to be happening with commercial websites:
They're being optimized for viewing on phones --
providing large text and short stories with high
titillation potential. Twitterized news. Or maybe I
should say twit-ized news. Mozilla can provide geolocation
for wifi-enabled laptops, but I expect they're probably
thinking about phones with all this. That then brings in
motion. There's no reason a website or phone app
can't repeatedly check geolocation lat/long to use
your movement in ad placement.... before it's all
sent to the NSA through a PRISM agreement. The sheer
technological possibilities are breathtaking.

[Rav]

<Rest snipped>

Not sure if that's the case. I don't know specifically how geo.enabled
works. My guess (and that's all that it is) is that in the case of
weather.com, it's a programming error on their part which causes a
completely failure to load when geo.enabled is false. I don't know if
they are "looking" at that setting and taking a wrong action, or if
they're just waiting for a response from Firefox that they never get if
the setting is false.

I would hope that Firefox would /prevent/ a web site from accessing your
location (from Firefox, at any rate) if geo.enabled is false. If sites
are /supposed/ to pay attention to that setting and "on their honor" not
access your location from Firefox if it's set to false, then it
certainly would be too easy for them to ignore it if they wanted to.

I pointed out an oversight to weather.com once before, and although they
eventually fixed it (and even e-mailed me to tell me they had done so),
it took many months. I hope they fix this one sooner.

[WaltS48]

I dunno. I set geo.enabled to false, have Firefox set to clear Browsing
and Download history, but not cookies, quit and restarted Firefox,
opened my weather.com bookmark and the page displays normally.

I still think it is PEBKAC

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.874.1458965112...@lists.mozilla.org>,

VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:

> While the article mentions gathering info from nearby wireless access
> points

SSIDs.

> (useless for those of use with wired home PCs) and the host's
> IP address, they also mention use of "service providers" for location
> data. Sounds like an IP geolocation lookup, to me, performed by the
> client rather than having the server do that lookup. In fact, later
> they mention "Google Location Services".

The SSIDs, along with the user's IP, are sent to the location service
provider, Google by default. That provider then determines the location
and sends that info back to the browser, which sends it on to the
site. (All this is assuming you okayed it when prompted.)

> So more data harvesting by Google as to where are the visitors to
> which web sites.

I can't wade through all the stuff you wondered about in your lengthy
post, but your conclusion that Firefox's geolocation feature is sending
info about which websites are being visited by anyone using the feature
is wrong.

> Considering the *loss* of privacy by having the client provide a site
> with geolocation data,

What loss of privacy? The user must explicitly okay any site's request
for the user's location.

> sure looks like this was Google's influence again
> on Mozilla as to another "feature" to the client.

<eyeroll>

[crossposted, followups set to mozilla.general]

[Rav]

I would be glad to hear any suggestions you may have as to how to adjust
my keyboard and/or chair to fix the weather.com problem. ;-)

[WaltS48]

Other than setting geo.enabled to true. Can't help.

Read all about location-aware browsing
<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/geolocation/>

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.882.1459000396...@lists.mozilla.org>,

WaltS48 <thali...@REMOVEaim.com> wrote:

> So, if a site doesn't ask if you want to "Share" your location, you
> are still sharing your location with geo.enabled set to true?

No, just setting it to true doesn't cause your location to be shared.
The workaround for weather.com's brokenness -- setting it to true but
then denying location info to weather.com -- is just a hassle for users
and doesn't gain weather.com any information.

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.871.1459004179...@lists.mozilla.org>,

Rav <Pa...@cais.com> wrote:

> Not sure if that's the case. I don't know specifically how
> geo.enabled works. My guess (and that's all that it is) is that in
> the case of weather.com, it's a programming error on their part which
> causes a completely failure to load when geo.enabled is false. I
> don't know if they are "looking" at that setting and taking a wrong
> action, or if they're just waiting for a response from Firefox that
> they never get if the setting is false.

I believe they're using browser-sniffing rather than
capability-sniffing and assuming that if the browser is Firefox, then
all the stuff required for the geolocation API is in place. But with
geo.enabled set to false, that stuff is not in place.

<https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/API/Geolocation/Using_geolocation>

Note: On Firefox 24 and older versions, "geolocation" in navigator
always returned true even if the API was disabled. This has been fixed
with Firefox 25 to comply with the spec. (bug 884921).

So they should be sniffing/testing the capability with

if ("geolocation" in navigator)

[EE]

I guess that depends on the service provider, then.

[EE]

I just left that setting blank, so the information would not go anywhere.

[EE]

VanguardLH wrote:
> Since one of the data points included in the geo data delivered by
> Firefox (or any geo-aware client) is the local IP address, I have to
> wonder what gets reported to a geo-aware site for someone visiting there
> using Tor or an anonymizing proxy. Seems client-offered geo data would
> obviate the privacy the Tor and anonymizing proxies afford. The user
> goes through the hassle of using an unreliable mesh network of slower
> nodes to hide their IP address only to have it divulged by the client
> when connecting to a geo-aware site.
>
> What if you use a public proxy to get around some regionally restricted
> content? You're told at a site that you cannot get to some content
> because you are outside their "broadcast region". I ran into that with
> the BBC site. I could use a public proxy located inside their region to
> get at the content that would otherwise be blocked.
>
> Also, just which IP address could Firefox deliver to a web site? How
> would Firefox know what is the WAN-side IP address (Internet-facing
> side) of your NAT router? Sending a site an intranet IP address, like
> 192.168.0.100 or 10.x.x.x, seems pointless to a site that wants to know
> where you are, not that your client is running in an intranet inside a
> router and has a private IP address. Besides the privacy issue with
> client's doling out geo data to sites, I wonder about companies that
> would prefer outsides to NOT be able to map the intranet inside a
> corporation's network.

If one is using a remote anonymous proxy, the IP address in the request
is that of the proxy, not the browser, since the proxy takes the request
and passes it on with its own address. With Tor, I suspect that the
address would be that of the last bounce site.

I am behind a router, yet the IP number reported by one of those "test
your browser" sites is the IP number given me by my service provider.
The router is like a local proxy, in that it would have to send the
correct IP number for the web server to use to send back whatever was
requested. If the server used 192.168.0.whatever, that would go to its
own router, and never get to you.

[Mayayana]

WARNING to anyone responding to >>Q<<
He's fond of messing with the address to make you
post to another group. Always check that before
posting.
----------------------------------------

| > So more data harvesting by Google as to where are the visitors to
| > which web sites.
|
| I can't wade through all the stuff you wondered about in your lengthy
| post, but your conclusion that Firefox's geolocation feature is sending
| info about which websites are being visited by anyone using the feature
| is wrong.
|

Why would you say that? The website uses
script to call geolocation data from Firefox. Firefox
reads data from the hardware and sends that to
Google (or its own service), which then returns
lat/long. Do you even imagine that the service
wouldn't be requiring the target website IP from
Firefox? If nothing else, they'd want it to assess
the use of their service. They may even charge
companies that use it more than x times per
day, as they do with Google maps.

On most sites they'll aalso have you via ad tracking,
google-analytics, google fonts, or google jquery.
(Google fonts is a fairly new issue that few people
are aware of, but *a lot* of webmasters now link
to Google fonts.) So they've got your IP. And they
probably already know who you are from the sheer
bulk of data collected as you move about online.

So there are actually 2 ways
for Google to connect the dots. One would be to
require the website IP in geolocation requests.
The other would be to just match the client IP
of geolocation requests with the IP's they're picking
up via ads, web beacons, fonts, jquery, script,
etc being called from the webpage. Either way,
it's reasonable to assume they're matching your
exact location with the record of online activity
they've collected on you.

Anyone who wants to avoid that tracking needs
to not only disable geolocation, but also most
script, cookies, 3rd-party images, font downloads.
And/or they should have a number of Google URLs
in their HOSTS file.

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.888.1459029037...@lists.mozilla.org>,

"Mayayana" <maya...@invalid.nospam> wrote:

> WARNING to anyone responding to >>Q<<
> He's fond of messing with the address to make you
> post to another group. Always check that before
> posting.

As always, I posted a notice saying that I was crossposting and setting
followup to mozilla.general, so reading my messages before replying to
them will help you avoid the unwarranted feeling that you're being
"messed with" in some way. Unless your reply has info to help the OP
solve the issue with weather.com, please don't override the followup
again.

> | your conclusion that Firefox's geolocation
> feature is sending | info about which websites are being visited by
> anyone using the feature | is wrong.
>
> Why would you say that?

Because Firefox doesn't send that info to the location service
provider.

[crossposted, followups set to mozilla.general again]

[Mayayana]

| Unless your reply has info to help the OP
| solve the issue with weather.com, please don't override the followup
| again.
|

I've never seen anyone with such a strange
attitude. If you want to send your posts off
to somewhere else, willy nilly, you'll have to
have that conversation alone. I don't subscribe
to the other group and the thread is not there.

| Because Firefox doesn't send that info to the location service
| provider.
|

Yes. They actually say that explicitly:

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/geolocation/

But as I explained, in practice it would be
very unlikely that Google couldn't easily connect
the simultaneous cookies/scripts/downloads from
Google domains. It's getting the same source
IP for geolocation that it gets for those calls.

Interestingly, it turns out that all major browsers
currently support geolocation as a standard DOM
scripting property.

[»Q«]

In
<news:mailman.890.1459032402...@lists.mozilla.org>,

"Mayayana" <maya...@invalid.nospam> wrote:

> | Unless your reply has info to help the OP
> | solve the issue with weather.com, please don't override the followup
> | again.
>
> I've never seen anyone with such a strange
> attitude. If you want to send your posts off
> to somewhere else, willy nilly, you'll have to
> have that conversation alone. I don't subscribe
> to the other group and the thread is not there.

I don't particularly *want* to discuss your speculations with you, so I
don't mind that your strange attitude prevents you from discussing
them elsewhere, but that certainly does not mean that you should
continue trying to discuss them here.

[crossposted, followup set to m.general, not "willy nilly"]

[Chris Ilias]

On 2016-03-26 5:49 PM, Mayayana wrote:
> WARNING to anyone responding to >>Q<<
> He's fond of messing with the address to make you
> post to another group. Always check that before
> posting.

The forum rules are for any off-topic discussion to be taken somewhere
more appropriate, with mozilla.general being a fallback.

Here's the link and quote:
<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/forums/etiquette/>
"Off-topic discussion not taken to private email, mozilla.general, or
any place where it is not considered off-topic, by someone who knows
they should be taking it elsewhere, is eligible for removal from the
news server."


--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
Mailing list/Newsgroup moderator

[Mayayana]

| The forum rules are for any off-topic discussion to be taken somewhere
| more appropriate, with mozilla.general being a fallback.

OK. Sorry. I thought the implications of enabling
geolocation were part of the thread. I'll be more
strict in my interpretation in the future.

[Ant]

On 3/26/2016 6:34 AM, Mr.E wrote:

>> The gist is that if you have geo-location turned off in Firefox
>> (geo.enabled set to false in about:config), that when you go to
>> weather.com, most of the page fails to load. You see a bunch of grey
>> squares, and that's pretty much it. It appears that weather.com
>> REQUIRES geo-location to be turned on -- globally -- not just the
>> per-site "Share Location." I'm using FF 45.0.1 under Windows 7 64-bit.
>> Safe mode (and disabling all plug-ins) makes no difference, and the
>> only reason a test profile "works" is that in a new profile geo.enabled
>> defaults to true.
>
> I have noted this exact behavior on 45.0 and 46b5.
> I solved this by taking TWC off my preferred checking and using WU.
> The availability of weather info sources is excellent and there is no
> reason for me to prefer TWC for internet weather.

You should still tell TWC because of this. Others and I did. So far,
nothing. If they get enough feedbacks about this issue, then they have
to fix it.
--
"Above ground I shall be food for kites; below I shall be food for
mole-crickets and ants. Why rob one to feed the other?" --Juang-zu (4th
Century B.C.)

[VanguardLH]

WaltS48 wrote:

> You went to the Weather Channel site and got the "Would you like to
> share your location with this site?" message, clicked the drop down
> arrow next to "Share Location", clicked "Never Share Location" and keep
> getting asked or what?
>
> I clicked never share, restarted the browser, went to the site and
> wasn't asked again.
>
> The site displays just fine, using Firefox 45.0, 46.0b5 and 48.0a1.
>
> Has anyone tried safe mode or a test profile?

>From https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/geolocation/, under "How do I
undo a permission granted to a site?" section, your choice is saved as a
site-specific setting. I have Firefox configured to purge history and
other items upon its exit. One of the enabled purge-on-exit settings is
"Site Preferences". Anyone that purges site preferences on exit will
lose their site-specific Always or Never choice. According to:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/delete-browsing-search-download-history-firefox?redirectlocale=en-US&redirectslug=Clear+Recent+History
(shortURL: http://preview.tinyurl.com/pf8sgzj)

selecting to delete Site Preferences on exit will eradicate those
site-specific preferences (permissions) that you chose earlier, like
whether a site gets to retrieve the client-provided geo data.

As a test, I set geo.enabled = true in about:config. Site Preferences
was still enabled as a purge-on-exit item. I exited Firefox and visited
weather.com. Got the Firefox-issued popup asking if I want to allow
that site to get the client-provided geo data. Selected "Never". I
exited Firefox, reloaded, and went to weather.com. Got the
Firefox-issued prompt again asking to allow or block giving the site my
geo data. Set the Site Preferences to not delete on exit from Firefox.
Redid the test. Did not get reprompted the 2nd time Firefox was loaded
and visited weather.com. Firefox now remembered by "Never" choice from
before.

Site Preferences is one of the fingerprinting hacks against Firefox to
track your web navigation. This was discussed here previously on how a
site can assign you a unique ID that survives across web browser
sessions (this is different than Canvas fingerprinting for which I use
the CanvasBlocker add-on with random hash return value). Visit:

http://www.radicalresearch.co.uk/lab/hstssupercookies

to check if you get the same tracking ID on each revisit. In Firefox,
to eliminate that fingerprint trick means having to purge site
preferences on exit. So check what you purge on exit from Firefox. I'm
guessing you keep site preferences between Firefox sessions.

[EE]

Do not forget to disable etags and third-party referrers as well. You
can be tracked with those. Those are worse than javascript. I blocked
Google-Analytics completely because its activities caused extreme
slowdowns in page loading.

[Ant]

On 3/26/2016 5:32 PM, Ant wrote:

>>> The gist is that if you have geo-location turned off in Firefox
>>> (geo.enabled set to false in about:config), that when you go to
>>> weather.com, most of the page fails to load. You see a bunch of grey
>>> squares, and that's pretty much it. It appears that weather.com
>>> REQUIRES geo-location to be turned on -- globally -- not just the
>>> per-site "Share Location." I'm using FF 45.0.1 under Windows 7 64-bit.
>>> Safe mode (and disabling all plug-ins) makes no difference, and the
>>> only reason a test profile "works" is that in a new profile geo.enabled
>>> defaults to true.
>>
>> I have noted this exact behavior on 45.0 and 46b5.
>> I solved this by taking TWC off my preferred checking and using WU.
>> The availability of weather info sources is excellent and there is no
>> reason for me to prefer TWC for internet weather.
>

> You should still tell TWC because of this. Others and I did. So far,
> nothing. If they get enough feedbacks about this issue, then they have
> to fix it.

Hi all!

I just got an e-mail, but it was lame:

"...
Ant
Subject: Website


------------------------------------------------------------------------

APR 07, 2016 | 11:36AM EDT
LaToya replied:

Thank you for reaching out to us!As we are working together to resolve
this as effectively as we can, we are asking our users to make sure
you:

-Upgrade your browser and /or app to a more recent version.
“Maintaining an updated browser is very important for security,
assuring
that your web pages load properly and improves your overall web
experience.”
-Clear your cache
-Disable all ad-blockers
-Try a different web browser
- (If applicable) Delete The Weather Channel bookmarks. If you would
like to save a bookmark, please bookmark weather.com and navigate to
your desired location from the home page.

Please let me know if this issue persists.

Thanks for being a fan of The Weather Channel!
...."

:(
--
"She's got ants in her pants." --unknown

[Rav]

On 3/24/2016 10:19 AM, Rav wrote:
> Ever since I upgraded to Firefox 45.0.1, weather.com no longer works.
> Only some of the page loads, but not enough to show any information or
> be able to enter a location. I've tried under safe mode, and that
> doesn't help. It works under Internet Explorer, and (once I'm no longer
> under safe mode) it works with IE Tab within Firefox. I'm running under
> Windows 7. Thanks for any help.

OP here. Weather.com just started working again today under Firefox!
And my geo.enabled setting is still set to false. Hopefully it's not a
fluke, and they actually fixed it.

To Ant (and others who had the same problem): Can you confirm that it
now works for you too? Thanks.

[VanguardLH]

Wasn't working before (as reported before). Working as of yesterday for
me. geo.enabled was and still is set to False. Looks like they finally
figured out how to test if the 'new' to create an geolocation object
worked or not.

[Ant]

Confirmed fixed on my end too! I guess they listened to us. If so, then
good job everyone! ;)
--
"Remember, ants are only waiting for you to die..." --unknown

[Ant]

Ditto. I did share this newsgroup thread
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.support.seamonkey/JY-fXrmN8LE
and
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.support.firefox/8A1VVmecjsY)
to sup...@theweatherchannel.desk-mail.com after LaToya gave me an
useless answer to prove that others were having the same problem. :)
--
"Is it for pleasure you were made? Not for doing, and for action? Look
at the plants, the sparrows, the ants, spiders, bees, all doing their
business, helping to weld the order of the world. And will you refuse
man's part? And not run the way of nature's ordering?" --Marcus Aurelius