Firefox 96.0.1 (64 bit) and I also use Adblock Plus along with NoScript. Also Win 10 Pro.

Also, is anyone else having problems with the bookmarklet not working in Chrome? I have 3rd party cookies enabled and I whitelisted this site but it just does the endless login when I try to submit a video. Firefox works just fine.

Is it me or is https://videosift.com/emojis showing its :flag... text letters and not actual graphics? Also, the emojis are too small there too. Please make them a little bigger like in the talks. I see them in both SeaMonkey v2.53.3 and Firefox v78 web browsers in my decade old, updated 64-bit W7 HPE SP1 PC.

Somewhere, Colin Kaepernick rolls his eyes.
(also, FireFox tries to auto-correct 'Kaepernick' to 'pumpernickle')

firefox and UBlock Origin

Heya Lucky.

FYI apparently my browser doesn't like channel talks.

I was trying to remember where the page was that had the channel descriptions, and tried the talk page to see if it was there.

Instead of comedy talk ( https://comedy.videosift.com/talk ) I got this - "Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead. Websites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not trust this site because it uses a certificate that is not valid for comedy.videosift.com. The certificate is only valid for videosift.com.

Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"

"Your browser does not currently recognize any of the video formats available." - Chrome on this page, but opens fine in Firefox, and if I copy/paste the main YouTube's page, it works fine as well. Not sure if this is a sift bug, a YouTube bug, or a Chrome bug.

Embed is not working for me.
Not working in Firefox.
Switched to Chrome to see it.

I agree that NoScript tends to make it a hassle to get basic functionality out of the vast majority of the web. You have to play around with allowing scripts from some domains and not others, on pretty much every page you visit.

...Which is pretty scary, if you think about it. Are all of those cross-site scripts beneficial or even necessary from a user standpoint? Hell no. Users stand to gain nothing from all that crap running. From our perspective, they just increase load times and data usage, often compounded with auto-reloading. We should have control over that stuff in all circumstances, but it becomes absolutely critical in mobile internet where we generally don't have as much processing power AND the vast majority of people have data usage caps.

Basically what I'm saying is, the admitted fact that NoScript tends to make the web unusable is a symptom of a deeper problem with how the web is constructed these days.

If you like the idea of NoScript, but generally find it too high-maintenance, you might want to try Privacy Badger. It requires somewhat less user input with regards to which trackers/scripts get blocked, instead going with defaults based on "trustworthiness" as measured by algorithms from the EFF. Those defaults can be tweaked if you desire, also.

I usually run a Firefox (or Pale Moon) client that is extremely locked down. UBlock Origin, NoScript, Privacy Badger, Self-Destructing Cookies, sometimes Ghostery, etc. I use that as my default browser, and take the time to fine-tune the controls in NoScript, element hiding in uBlock, etc. for sites that I visit regularly.

But frequently, I'll find a link to some article that I want to read and notice that the page content won't load at all since it requires some nonsensical script. In those cases, if I don't want to take the time to fiddle with NoScript etc. permissions, I copy the URL and fire up Chrome in incognito mode, with only uBlock Origin.

Probably not worth the hassle for most people, but I guess I'm kicking and screaming my way into this brave new world.

Nope, I once had to look up what those little yellow marks on the timeline were when I viewed stuff on YouTube. Firefox + Adblock Plus + NoScript = a much better and safer browsing experience. Although sometimes YouTube does change things up a bit and Adblock has to play catch up, otherwise my YouTube videos are just black screens.

firefox works, guess I'll have to tolerate it until this gets resolved.

@Mordhaus
Why would you prefer chrome over firefox?
Just asking because I do not have a preference after opera dropped out of my sweet spot.

I've done everything you have @PlayhousePals and I'm dead in the water also. I'll keep trying for a while, not really keen on using Firefox.

Well, that's a new one...

Have you tried a different browser, like Firefox?

Is anyone else seeing anything like this?

Nothing has changed on our end, so I'm not sure what Chrome is picking up on. Hmm...