Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)

To: ce <chaosentropy@outlook.com>
Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
From: Nicolas George <george@nsup.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2023 17:06:29 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] ZIHudQT6+gorjVb+@phare.normalesup.org>
Reply-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] PH7PR22MB368542CEA7CF8372D6376EE7C150A@PH7PR22MB3685.namprd22.prod.outlook.com>
References: <[🔎] 647B188D.2030300@fastmail.fm> <[🔎] u5f7j2$lvr$1@ciao.gmane.io> <[🔎] 647B25FC.4060003@fastmail.fm> <[🔎] u5hb57$14vi$1@ciao.gmane.io> <[🔎] 58a49bff-eb0b-a4e3-6904-f194358ef03f@busby.net> <[🔎] 20230605175911.1e0a7bd097fce7fa1f12ec3e@gmail.com> <ZH6wfjBL/0FwWTuD@tuxteam.de> <[🔎] 20230608004538.00003d69@online.de> <ZIFodpSU3z2L/fTC@tuxteam.de> <[🔎] PH7PR22MB368542CEA7CF8372D6376EE7C150A@PH7PR22MB3685.namprd22.prod.outlook.com>

ce (12023-06-08):
> What about ads for car insurance?

Yes, what about them? What do you think they have special?

(Hint: an ad for a car insurance is not to convince you to subscribe to
any insurance rather than none, it is to convince you to subscribe to
this insurance rather than any other.)

-- 
  Nicolas George

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to:

References:
- Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Bret Busby <bret@busby.net>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Celejar <celejar@gmail.com>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: <tomas@tuxteam.de>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Oliver Schoede <oliver.schode@online.de>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: <tomas@tuxteam.de>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: ce <chaosentropy@outlook.com>

Prev by Date: Running Debian without initramfs?
Next by Date: Re: Link to import-im6.q16 not allowed by security policy ?
Previous by thread: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
Next by thread: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread