this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2025
374 points (93.7% liked)

Technology

66067 readers
5320 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 content.
  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
 

I am tired of Firefox shitty takes.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 41 minutes ago)

Ok so what we need is a Mozilla alternative, yo EFF; What are you upto ?

Actually how about SeaMonkey

[–] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 33 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

It would hurt badly at the beginning, but it would be better in the long run if Mozilla were to lose that Google search payment. Take some of the financial hit out of the c-suite comp package. Let those more interested in tech industry CEO money go work for the likes of Google, etc. Mozilla should be looking to attract someone whose singular motivation is not money.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Mozilla outage going to take a 90% hit to their income without going all-in on ads and user tracking.

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

You think the heads salaries/bonus/lobbying budget will be the first to get axed if google money goes away?

[–] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago

No, I don't think that is where the cuts will be. But it should be.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

it's not a shitty take; google signed a contract with mozilla and google should have to honour it.

if you want mozilla to be less reliant on outside income... DONATE TO THEM.

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 31 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

To have 90% of my donation money syphoned away into the CEO?

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago

Not to mention the CEOs or Mozilla brought in no apparent value. The company and products have been on a clear decline but compensation packages are higher. Its fucking stupid.

[–] salacious_coaster@infosec.pub 17 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I've been donating for a while. Not pleased to learn about the lavish CEO pay. Probably going to stop.

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 8 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

yeah, mozilla hasn't had to worry about actually giving a fuck and that's rotten them to the core

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago

I've become sincerely disappointed with them. I hope they reconsider their choices but I don't have much hope.

[–] suite403@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

This really sucks. I JUST swapped over to Mozilla about a week ago.

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Use librewolf then. It's not that deep

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Yeah. I've been using Firefox for the greater half of my life. I'm bummed out.

[–] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 51 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It really is a shitty take. Mozilla are essentially saying they depend on Google remaining a monopoly; and that we shouldn't fight the bad guys because the bad guys might hurt us if we try.

The Mozilla blog post was all about the DOJ asking to end search-bar payments, and how this might hurt independent browser. But I saw no mention of the DOJ saying that Google must sell Chrome; which I think is very relevant to the discussion about browser dominance.

More and more I believe that Mozilla's current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.

[–] LwL@lemmy.world 21 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

More and more I believe that Mozilla's current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.

I think the salary alone is enough evidence of that. There's a point, specifics of which will depend on your living situation, at which wanting a higher salary requires the same infinite greed that becoming a billionaire requires. And I'm very sure that this point is far below 1 million dollars a year. Mozilla's CEO makes over 6 million.

If you feel like you deserve that, you are not fit to lead a nonprofit. You have already proven that you care more about giving yourself obscene wealth than about the benefit of others.

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

And I'm very sure that this point is far below 1 million dollars a year.

Personally I place the amount around 600,000. Rich enough for anything reasonable.

[–] jdeath@lemm.ee 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

setting one number is a little silly tho. somebody with 4 kids has totally different needs than a single person. especially if someone has a kid with special needs the costs can be huge. obviously that doesn't apply to these CEOs but I would say one person doesn't need more than 100k

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 23 minutes ago) (1 children)

I mean if you're talking about "need" as in absolute need the number goes down a lot more. But 100k doesn't go too far anymore.

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

Depends on where you are. In my country, 50k (€) a year could lend you your own individual house, fit all basic needs, and leave a fair amount for leisure.

[–] betternotbigger@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Maybe making a browser doesn't need to be so damn expensive. Let the web standards freeze so we aren't constantly chasing shiny things. The browser is in a really good spot today. What else does it need to be?

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 13 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

A non-exhaustive list:

  • creating a webpage has gotten too complicated and time-consuming
  • accessibility, light/dark, should be a browser-feature, not something each.single.webpage has to implement
  • monetization is an ongoing issue
  • browsers need to do too much, are too complex and monolitic
  • lots of duplication of software/system tasks in the browser, like process/memeory-management. But on webpage-side too, like video player, see point 1 and 2. Called inner-platform effect
[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

I'll be honest, I booted up a laravel project through herd and I've got a testing environment setup for the let go.

There's a ton of stuff I still want to be supported, especially web assembly.

But for most things, yeah, we could probably slow down a bit.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 122 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (20 children)

Does anybody expect them to say anything else? Web engine development is more costly than even OS development, we're talking costs that often run into the hundreds of millions per year – it's virtually impossible to fund unless you're a giant like Google or being funded by someone with very deep pockets, like... er... Google.

Even MS bailed and ceded power to Google, because it simply didn't make financial sense. Apple does it but they're pretty meh in terms of implementing standards and such... there's a reason 3rd party WebKit browsers are rare. They comparatively run it on a shoestring budget, and they're Apple FFS - their wealth is practically limitless!

People aren't going to start paying to use Firefox, and that money needs to come from somewhere. The community rejects giants paying Mozilla (understable sentiment), rejects paying for Firefox (also understandable), and rejects Mozilla selling data (definitely understandable). Some say donations, but be real, that won't make hundreds of millions per year.

What is the solution here? I'm not trying to be contrarian I just don't know what they can actually do. You'd hope that the Linux Foundation or something would chip in, but nope, they help Chromium instead. I worry for the future of web browsers.

That said, I'm also deeply uncomfortable with Google being able to pay to be default search on so many products. It gives them a huge advantage. I don't want them to have that advantage. It's anticompetitive and scummy as fuck.

Mozilla are definitely between a rock and a hard place here. I don't like some of the decisions they make, but damn, I'm not sure I have the smarts to come up with better ones, given the position and market they're in.

[–] Exec@pawb.social 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Web engine development is more costly than even OS development

Unfortunately, many applications that used to be desktop applications in the past are now programs that run in the web browser. It doesn't matter anymore if they are a lot less effective than being native.

we’re talking costs that often run into the hundreds of millions per year – it’s virtually impossible to fund unless you’re a giant

That is the problem - the web needs to be a lot simpler, browser development should cost fractions of that. It got unnecessarily, absurdly complex.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

SASS has pushed the work their app developers should be doing onto the development teams of web browsers.

[–] shortrounddev@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I know I'm in the minority but I would pay yearly to use Firefox. Not sure how much I'd pay, but I am getting into the habit of purchasing software instead of allowing it to purchase me

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works 59 points 1 day ago

I mean, I see their point, but it's still a bad take. At the end of the day, this monopoly needs to be broken up. Also, have they tried not hiring a bunch of new executives and capping CEO pay at 300 000?

[–] PumpkinEscobar@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago

Having been a firefox user for a few years now, Screw Mozilla. What a mismanaged shit-show they've become.

I get that browser development costs a ton, and that they're in a shitty position. But to make this ode to stockholm syndrome blog post... what on EARTH?

Best case, Chrome gets split off into a separate organization free of meddling and they can fund themselves with reasonable donations / investments. In reality, I'm sure Google and other advertising companies will try to get into it and buy the behavior they want, like special-interest groups in US politics.

But if Chrome ended up under any organization with reasonable management who wasn't completely beholden to advertisers, I'd switch back to Chrome pretty quickly (assuming the whole Manifest V2/V3 thing got un-fucked).

[–] DaveyRocket@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] victorz@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Can that continue to function if Firefox dies? Like, is it independent to where it will develop web platform features on its own?

[–] DaveyRocket@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I’ll be honest, outside of tabs, I can’t think of much that has improved with browsers in the past few years.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Oh, no no, I don't mean the UI of the browser, I mean web platform features, like JavaScript APIs, JavaScript language features, and CSS features and such.

[–] mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hardly surprising, looking at how many former google and Facebook employees are in Mozilla’s management.

[–] dagarnok@50501.chat 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Mozilla is such a disorganized company. Why wouldn't they find another search engine deal besides Google? It's possible that they could find another deal somewhere, but it seems to me that they don't care — more like they're a controlled competitor. I'm not surprised considering they scrapped their wording regarding privacy, which leads to a lot of ambiguities.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Google overpays quite a bit so they have a viable competitor to point to for chrome. If the payment tracked FF's usage numbers it would be way lower now. It makes no financial sense for any other search engine to pay that much.

That's assuming they could even afford it. Most can't

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›