It sucks but Firefox trying to replace Google's ad money with someone else's ad money is they most Mozilla solution to anything ever.

@cadadr I don't like much about the new Mozilla revenue solution, from the solution itself to the framing. I'm not sure what the right solution would be though.

@emacsomancer I think we're beyond solutions. As it is, Mozilla is set to fail, in the most SV way: withering away while spending investor money.

They simply shouldn't have bit larger than they could chew. When, back then we made these criticisms and predictions, we were lunatics. Now were watching IE 2.0 happen.

There's a saying in Turkish: to lose the grain back home while traveling to Dimyat for rice. This is basically it.

@cadadr I think one additional issue is that for a while Firefox was much slower than Chrom{e|ium} and that also involved snowballing user loss to Chrome. (Early excitement about anything Google helped Chrome of course too.)

You're almost certainly correct in your predictions. I'm really not crazy about using even ungoogled chromium though. Technically, I think it's simply not as good as Firefox. And, more importantly, it just means increasing the control over the structure of the web that Google (and I suppose, to a lesser extent, Microsoft with renewed popularity of Edge) have.

(I know Safari has a not insignificant marketshare, but it's not clear to me to what extent they influence the web in structural ways, other than the effects of their being very slow to adopt new protocols etc. I suppose that could end up being a good thing in a post-Firefox world. *shudders*)

@emacsomancer Yeah, ungoogled chromium is not exactly preferable, and if I'm honest, if I didn't hate the guts of Mozilla, I'd still prefer Firefox over it because overall it's a better browser.

I doubt a FOSS browser that's on part with Chrome can be built and maintained with Mozilla's model. We've gone beyond the realm of software here, we're in the battlefield of capitalism. Ads aren't a nuisance anymore, they are honestly a form of labour.

@cadadr From what I understand, by Jan 2023, it may no longer be possible to have effective ad blockers on Chrome, Chromium, or derivatives. So there may soon be swaths of new (futile) "labourers".

Follow

@cadadr

" .... Raymond Hill, who develops uBlock Origin, voiced their concern over the drafts that Google published at the time. Hill stated back then that Manifest V3 could be the end of uBlock Origin for Google Chrome...."

ghacks.net/2021/09/24/manifest

@cadadr so if Firefox becomes unviable, it may be a choice between dubiously secure browsers and no-ad-block Chrom{e|ium}+derivatives.

@emacsomancer @cadadr though I'm not a fan of Mozilla either, I do think that anyone who can should donate to them and promote them as a public good software (to make it funded by organizations, governments, etc)... I don't see any other way out of this situation.
Failing to do so cannot get us anywhere good: there's no way chrome-based browsers can be a sustainable solution.
Alternatively, you may donate to other browsers like Gnome Web, but Firefox is the only true alternative at this time.

@silmathoron @emacsomancer Mozilla owns companies (Pocket), has people that make 6 figures, holds valuable property, recently terminated 250 people, broke every workflow I had with their apps, act antithetical to their goals, and have contempt for community. I'd much rather burn my money (which I don't have, but :flan_shrug:) in a campfire than give it to Mozilla, unless they concretely right those wrongs.

@cadadr @emacsomancer yes, the fact that the for-profit Mozilla corporation exists is very unfortunate and is probably at the root of many of these terrible events.
However, the donated money would go to the (non-profit) Mozilla Foundation and directly serve the development of the software, not to serve indecent paychecks to company CEOs.

@cadadr I've given Mozilla small amounts of money in the past, but my understanding (now) is that this money doesn't even get to the browser developers, but goes elsewhere in Mozilla.

@silmathoron

@emacsomancer @cadadr do you have concrete evidence for that? (I'm genuinly interested because some of my money's going there, and so far I've had no reason to doubt it was properly used but if there is some reason then I'd like to check)

@silmathoron That's what I've been hearing this week. I'll have to investigate further.

@cadadr

@emacsomancer Problem is, this notwithstanding, it's collectively a rounding error on the $400mil they get from Google & whatever from pushing Yandex, a Russian-oligarchy-adjacent company, in my country.

Whatever I can give to Mozilla can go to indie foss devs or honest artists, journalists, etc (for which I already spare a couple $ which is all I can afford).

I must add for @silmathoron (who doesn't know me ofc) that if I was writing this back in 2019, I'd be wam more sympathetic to Mozilla.

@cadadr @emacsomancer yes of course, you have to donate to whoever you can based on your priorities, I meant that I think people who can still give after they've given to whoever came first should probably give to Mozilla... it would also shows devs there that they could potentially sustain themselves if they were to fork it and advertise it.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
types.pl

A Mastodon instance for programming language theorists and mathematicians. Or just anyone who wants to hang out.