On 2016-08-06, nospam wrote:
In article , Aardvarks
wrote:

it's amazing how much useless nonsensical spew he can generate without
ever finding the very 'facts' he claims to seek.

Funny coming from you ... who has never once told the truth.

Your URL simply says that, as I predicted, that Safari is primitive code
that doesn't even support the modern battery-status HTML5 spec which
debuted years ago.

first you babble that the battery status is a 'privacy exploit' and
that it should be disabled, then when it's shown that safari is not
vulnerable at all, you call safari primitive.

So lame. He's fooling nobody here.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR