this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
1315 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

72217 readers
3227 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Got to buy material for house renovation, several hundreds € of saving if I bought on one website that didn’t work with Firefox. Guess what I did.

Almost everyone choose money and commodity over everything else. Firefox is doomed to fail, and I say that as Firefox user.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You could have said the same for Internet Explorer some years ago, and they got their lunch eaten despite being free AND the default owned by a monopoly

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

The difference is that Google had the capital and a monopoly itself. Mozilla doesn't have shit.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except and arguably better product in the browser space?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Both Mozilla and Opera had better browsers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mozilla has a regular income from Google.

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

Yeah, they're pretty much owned by Google, thus not a competitor.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google paying Firefox explicitly to make Google the default search engine. That doesn’t mean they own Firefox in any way shape or form. Firefox routinely makes anti Google decisions, and acts against googles interest. It’s pretty clear they aren’t googles bitch.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Most of the revenue of Mozilla Corporation comes from Google (81% in 2022). They have influence.

The excuse of search engine funding is a fig leaf for the US and monopoly laws.

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

Google pays every browser they can to make Google the default search engine. Including direct competitors, and companies that have a direct interest in going against Google. Companies like Apple, who butt heads with Google regularly.

That doesn’t mean they have influence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed. Those other companies don't rely on Google for 80% of their income. That's where the influence occurs.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you point to an example of Mozilla bending the knee, in the slightest, on a subject Google would want them to have a different opinion than normal on?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

why doesn't Firefox adopt the features of AdBlock Plus and CustomizeGoogle

Google refuses to fix [a phishing enabling] flaw, as it believes that it is not a problem. Google also operates the Firefox phishing blacklist

https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/a-dangerous-conflict-of-interest-between-firefox-and-google/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The first explicitly states its conjecture. In reality, it’s much more likely in my mind that Mozilla is not well suited to fast paced changes like the recent YouTube cat and mouse Adblock saga. Imagine if you were waiting not for an extension update, but a browser update.

The second isn’t even about Mozilla. They rely on Google for the anti phishing list. Is there a free and open alternative? I legitimately can’t find one. I can find paid alternatives, but I doubt users would be willing to pay.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe these are reasonable examples of slightly bending of Mozillas knee to Google, as requested.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The second one isn’t even Mozilla…

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mozilla chooses to implement Google's phishing list.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Such as?

Like, you’re pretty clear about not using Google. The question is, what service exists that is within their ability to pay (free)?

“They shouldn’t use google” is a fine argument, assuming it’s possible to stop using google without incurring huge fees and/or removing the functionality completely.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why assume they won't pay?

Even for free they could support something like openphish.com and help it grow and maybe outclass Google.

The point is that we don't know the details of their agreement, nor the unwritten rules to guarantee continued support.

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

openphish.com would very likely buckle under the load. They’ve had ~2 million urls per day in the past seven days. There are 181 times that many users of Firefox.

Again, I get where you’re coming from. There’s just literally no viable alternative.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe there's no viable alternative because Firefox users are not supplying the demand.

However, rather have the current arrangement than no Firefox. But I suspect that Mozilla are not as free from Google as they would like to be.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

However, if Google decided one day to yank 80% of Mozilla's income...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah that would be problematic to an extent. But I doubt that’ll happen, and if it did I’m sure it would continue just in a slower/reduced capacity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yes but Internet Explorer had massive issue, nowadays it’s Firefox that has compatibility issue, doesn’t have a platform where its default (Microsoft has windows/edge, android/chrome, iPhone/safari) and no meaningfull advantage on the other.

The cards are stacked against it, if only they could use Google money to get some advantage, like a better design. Right now if I open Firefox there is 3 row of sponsored clickbait articles. The reason I paid money for Mac is because I was fed up of the very same bullshit on windows, make something lean, sleek that works well and people might use it but here it’s a kind of dinosaur software that is even filled with sponsored articles.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But you're forgetting something important: Firefox is open-source, meaning that it is literally impossible for it to fail. Even if the Mozilla org goes down in flames tomorrow.

If Mozilla dies, someone else will become a maintainer for the Firefox open-source project. If they are compromised or bought out, someone will fork the project (again). If 100% of websites make some code change that forces them to only work on a Chromium rendering engine, the developers of one of the Firefox forks (or, more likely, all of them) will implement a fix within days that spoofs whatever signal the lock-in code requires. If some form of online DRM is implemented, it will be cracked and the solution will be made available online. Or the relevant chunk of Chromium will be copied and modified to generate that verification key on Firefox without telemetry.

The browser may never achieve market dominance, but it doesn't have to. It's on the Internet, and on the Internet nothing ever truly goes away.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure nothing goes away on the internet but things get deprecated. Keeping up with a browser development must require highly technical engineer, who often don’t work for free. If Mozilla were to disappear or get 80% of its budget removed (Google) one can doubt they would be able to keep up with the evolution of internet.

I mean just look at Linux desktop, people working on it for free is great but it’s slow, innefective and it goes to all direction at the same time. Without million of $ behind it, Firefox would be gone in a year or two whatever the amount of fork happening.

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

That's just...not true on any level at all. Of course things get deprecated, but engineers work for free on open source projects all the time.

And you understand nothing about Linux development if you think its development is slow; the kernel already has stable support for Intel's Meteor Lake graphics, which were released only 43 days ago at the time of this comment.

The idea that Firefox would be "gone in a year or two" without Google's money ignores the reality that there are thousands of large, successful open-source projects without massive financial endowments, projects that are still continuously updated over years and even decades for no other reason than that the maintainers want to use them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Misunderstanding, I was speaking of Linux desktop environment. You think I speak of Linux. Linux is backed by dozen of companies like Google, Microsoft, Meta. It sure doesn’t lack any fund. Now compare it to the Linux desktop environment where this is mostly people working for free, shit doesn’t get done in 43 days. For instance, Wayland has been out for several years and many environment still doesn’t work with it or have not even started working on it.

The closest open source project I can think of is libreoffice. Just check it, it lacks tons of functions compared to ms but most important is that it barely improved at all in years. Now doc document aren’t going to change drastically , file from the 90’s are still compatible but the web foundation it improves very fast. When I say 2 years I’m generous, its already half dead (3.14% user !), breaking compatibility would be the nail in the coffin.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually, LibreOffice is the perfect example, thank you. After OOo development went in a direction the community didn't agree with, the Document Foundation was formed and the project was immediately forked. 13½ years later, the project is still updated every six months. It has every necessary feature and supports all formats. A browser would be similar; web standards don't change that much. Wayland, by comparison, is currently a niche product for a niche product; it doesn't need the same support, and so it doesn't get it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well I admire your optimism, personally I don’t have much faith into open source project because their is often very little or no money for the developer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The last forty years of FOSS software would beg to differ.