this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
459 points (97.3% liked)

Firefox

17898 readers
53 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 167 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hey, Laura. Fuck you. Fuck your profits and your corporate greed. Enshit yourself till you close down.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 143 points 1 month ago (8 children)

What if we could have a world that wasn't powered by ads? I'd like to get past this "only one way to run the internet" train of thought.

I'm just so tired of ads, commercials and advertising in general. It's exhausting.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 month ago (14 children)

It's either that, a subscription model of some sort, going to pay to install models, or something else to fund themselves. I'd suggest going to a donation based model, but I doubt there's enough Firefox users willing to pay to even be able to keep it alive more than a year or two tops.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 131 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The enshitification of Firefox continues 😢

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago

Cory Doctorow: "Disenshittify or die!" (YouTube)

[–] [email protected] 90 points 1 month ago

Frankly, I'm surprised it took them so long to say this publicly. For over a year, Mozilla has had a de facto conflict of interest when it came to their stance on advertisements, so take anything they say about their necessity with a huge grain of salt...

May 2023: Mozilla purchases FakeSpot, a company that sells private data to advertisers. Mozilla keeps selling private data to advertisers to this day.

June 2024: Mozilla purchases Anonym, an AdTech company.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Not everyone?

Does anyone?

Good thing we can fork, I guess, but it's kinda sad to watch a previously good org die

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Fork, blah, blah, blah.

When one of these forks doesn't depend on Mozilla to do all the heavy lifting of security updates and compatibility fixes, then maybe we can talk seriously about forks. But no fork does fuck-all towards the hard part of maintaining a web browser engine. So forks mean nothing.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I've been using librewolf over the last week. Honestly.... It's a drop in replacement for me

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 month ago (2 children)

At this point, I don't see many other options to keep everything going for Firefox. If they somehow lose the go*gle money they use to keep themselves going, they need another revenue source and I severely doubt there are enough Firefox users willing to pay enough to keep it going as it currently does. Don't like it, but I'm gonna at least play devil's advocate.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago

It would be nice if they at least allowed for even being able to donate to the browser itself. All the options that I am aware of are either the paid extra stuff they have, or to the overall company. Which is annoying since I imagine that the current "donation" option means that the money is being used mostly for the upper execs and routed to the extra shit that already has options for paying subs.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (10 children)

They could try not having an overinflated budget?

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

And, for the foreseeable future at least, advertising is a key commercial engine of the internet, and the most efficient way to ensure the majority of content remains free and accessible to as many people as possible.

I'm afraid they aren't wrong. The majority of people aren't going to pay for access to random blogs etc. So we'd end up with only the big players having usable sites.

People kick off about ads but rarely suggest an alternative to funding the internet.

Back in the day ads were targeted based on the website's target audience not the user's personal data. It works fine but is less effective. Don't see why they couldn't go that way.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You posted this on Lemmy.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 month ago (8 children)

I don't believe a web browser should be designed specifically for one business model, period.

There are plenty of free sites. Truly free, with no ads.

There are plenty of paid sites, supported by subscribers.

There are plenty of sites funded by educational institutions, nonprofits, or similar.

There used to be plenty of sites that were supported by non-invasive ads.

I don't give a damn if everyone uses Facebook and Google. That doesn't mean we need to cater to their business model at the technical level.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Internet was fine in the early 2000s before the rise of social media platforms resulted in surveillance advertisement complex.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In parallel to our existing consumer products, we have the opportunity to build a better infrastructure for the online advertising industry as a whole. Advertising at large cannot be improved unless the tech it’s built upon prioritizes securing user data. This is precisely why we acquired Anonym. 

Catering to the ad industry is backwards thinking, imo. Securing user data is easy enough if you do not collect it to begin with.

Imo, the fact companies have changed the narrative in favor of advertisers and data collection, proves only profit matters, not the people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Oh you mean one of the only two reasons I use this fucking thing? Ad blocking and privacy?

You're shitting on both. That's like... Idk, Craftsman making tools out of plastic and removing the lifetime warranty... Wtf do I even need you for then?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I feel like I’m reading a different article than everyone else. The comments made me think the article would be adding advertisements, but it seems to be trying to find a way forward to facilitate advertisements while maintaining privacy.

Without technical details I’m not sure that’s a bad thing. I know lemmy is largely “Mozilla bad”, but I’m just not sure the comments are in line with the proposal.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (13 children)

I originally was one of the "FUCK FIREFOX IS FUCKED" people. However, after taking a deep breath and actually reading, yes, you are correct. There is no indication that they're blocking adblockers or taking away firefox customization. I think they're both looking for alternative revenue streams and trying to make the advertising business less intrusive. That being said, their communication is absolute dogshit and they deserve a lot of the shit they get. But I am not yet panicking. Firefox remains the best choice for blocking ads.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 month ago (24 children)

I kept giving Mozilla the benefit of the doubt and telling myself things weren't so bad.

I was wrong.

I'll continue using Firefox because it's the least bad option, but I can't advocate for it in good faith anymore, and I don't expect it to last long with this orientation.

So it goes.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 month ago (1 children)

She went on to work at eBay for 13 years, followed by PayPal, Skype, and Airbnb. source

why would Mozilla choose to be directed by an ebay+paypal+airbnb experience and can somebody with that background not think like this ☞

"Because Mozilla’s mission is to build a better internet. And, for the foreseeable future at least, advertising is a key commercial engine of the internet, and the most efficient way to ensure the majority of content remains free and accessible to as many people as possible."

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Advertising will not improve unless we address the underlying data sharing issues, and solve for the economic incentives that rely on that data.

thanks to Mozilla for assuming the responsibility of improving advertising

We can’t just ignore online advertising — it’s a major driver of how the internet works and is funded. We need to stare it straight in the eyes and try to fix it. For those reasons, Mozilla has become more active in online advertising over the past few years. - MARK SURMAN, PRESIDENT, MOZILLA source

if we stay with that metaphor of "We need to stare it straight in the eyes and try to fix it", it's not difficult to imagine Mark and Mozilla being swallowed by the monster he's "staring straight in the eyes" :/

i hope they can filter the shit Mozilla will include in Firefox from mull and mullvad

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

She's not particularly wrong, but this highlights the problem for me.

Why does the corporate arm behind one of the last "free" browsers out there need to become involved in this clear conflict of interest?

Why does this need to be developed as core functionality in the browser codebase instead of as an addon like most of the previous experiments?

There is repeated insistence that this is key to the future of the web. I don't neccessarily disagree. I disagree entirely that this should have any direct contact with the Firefox project. Create a separate subsidiary within Mozilla for this shit. Anything to maintain a wall between the clearly conflicting goals.

This all reads like a new CEO coming in hungry to make a mark rather than actually just be a steward to keeping business as usual going.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 month ago (2 children)

But taking on controversial topics because we believe they make the internet better for all of us is a key feature of Mozilla’s history.

Is it?

I would rather have a world where Mozilla is actively engaged in creating positive solutions for hard problems, than one where we only critique from the sidelines.

Maybe your users don't.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago

Yeah adblock plus said the same thing. A lot of companies have said the same thing. It always comes down to greed

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Mozilla's non-profit status needs to be revoked.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago

Literally no one but advertisers like ads. Anything that leads to more ads being shown is a negative to your community. Some might understand the need to make money, but that doesn't make anyone like ads.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It is time to fork Firefox. Mozilla has bern hijacked by people who don't care about its vision.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It’s already been done, LibreWolf is what Firefox originally set out to be.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 month ago (4 children)

fuckFuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck

But at least forking is still an option. The instant they make any moves that inhibit forking or privacy on forks, Firefox will be completely dead. For now, it’s just gangrenous.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Good luck with even maintaining that fork up to date , with security threats and web standards changing so quickly.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I honestly never expected the final death blow for Firefox to come from Mozilla.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (13 children)

Can one thing please not be full of adverts :( I'll pay for the browser, I just want marketers to fuck off for a while lol

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 month ago

This is just a huge fuck you to their community.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago

Yeah, perhaps because advertisements go against the values that users look for in your browser?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago

This breaks my heart.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Wow, utterly shocked that a company with a shit CEO that takes most of its money from Google would have these viewpoints.

I'm sure it is completely coincidental that ublock is about to die as well.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The only ones who will embrace it are the advertisers....

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Ladybird is not usable yet, but it's an independent browser and engine that accepts donations

repo - https://github.com/LadybirdBrowser/ladybird

youtube channel with monthly updates - https://www.youtube.com/@LadybirdBrowser/videos

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (4 children)

My problem with this in spite of the dire situation they face if Google is forced to cut funding by anti-trust court rulings (or not even forced but they make paying off Mozilla a moot point so they stop) is that they become an ad company. Ads become tied to their CEO compensation, to the salaries of the people who develop it.

They claim they're making a better kind of ad network, a privacy respecting kind. The problem is the ad industry doesn't want less data, they want more. There are no looming laws that would force the ad industry to adopt a more privacy respecting alternative or die and without that the ad industry is going to shun this and it'll be a failure and then they'll have a failed ad network that they can either discard entirely or adapt to industry standards of privacy invasion and abuse and continue to exist and then they'll make another "hard choices" post about having to do that.

And I can see it now. This experiment will fail and after some pressure from the ad industry and some devil-on-shoulder whispering Mozilla will begrudgingly start to enshittify. Their ad network will become less privacy respecting by tiny little steps, by salami-slicing or boiling the frog, the whole privacy-preserving measurement thing will be thrown out BUT they'll still claim they respect you more than Google and will at first perhaps but that will erode. Maybe they'll just implode at some point after that which given Google is being found a monopoly works just fine for Google and the rest of big tech who want a more centralized, locked down browser company that wants to help implement DRM that can't be circumvented, that wants to help lock down everything on the web to restrict users freedoms to choose what is displayed or if they can save it or record it or copy it to say nothing of blocking ads.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Time to switch to other fork

load more comments
view more: next ›