Payments to nonexistent companies? Funding politics? Reliance on a single customer? And that's just for starters.
  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    2·
    2 years ago

    Eh… article behind a paywall. But yes Mozilla’s finances and top management are sadly extremely sketchy… basically they are bought opposition by Google. Sadly, as Firefox is a really important part of the web and works quite well.

  • leanleft@lemmy.ml
    1·
    2 years ago

    i dont care about specific finance details
    its real simple: is all potential user tracking technologies removed? if no, WHY?? (suddenly i’m looking at the money as a huge conflict of interest)
    furthermore… do people want tracking so they can visit microsoft.com facebook.com google.com ?
    ok fine. [no fault of mozilla]
    but personally, i cant relate to these mainstream desires. i try not use it and i barely support what the project is doing.
    so basically what firefox is doing could be interpreted as benign catering to mainstrean userbase(at best!). but firefox has less value by my high standards.
    if ff uses this alibi, then all the Freedom and Transparent sentiment is extinguished instantly.

    firefox does not stand fully against mainstream privacy technology. firefox is betting that privacy advocates will not win.
    maybe thats true. maybe we should just settle for the lesser evil.
    it would be cooler if firefox sponsored smaller more radical privacy projects.
    currently it feels like ff sucks the wind out of the sails of radical projects to grease acceptance to mainstream of the last resisters.

    i do not think mozilla will support radical technologies.

    1. rad tech is assumed to replace what firefox currently does.
    2. firefox is happily accepting money from google to continue development of their mainstream project.

    what if ff is right? what if google/facebook would win and force tech elites to login to windows.com .
    ff would be the last competitor before an antitrust situation would sweep the internet into a dark age. that would not be good.

    how bad would it be to use googlechrome for 5min per day to check your bank.and then switch to existing rad tech? it might be feasible…(and beneficial to rad tech! like gemini). or maybe the gov would let sites force js for every webpage!! that would be bad.
    that seems seems like exactly where we have ended up these days under mozilla’s leadership. it obviously hasnt been working. but maybe the floor could somehow be lower!
    currently many sites refuse to serve nojs,vpn,tor. it could always defy extrodinary disbelief into literal clownshow donaldtrump amazonkillerdrone land.

  • timbuck2themoon@lemmy.ml
    1·
    2 years ago

    Unless someone wants to pay Firefox an ungodly sum out of their own pocket I fail to see how relying on Google for search engine money is so bad.

    They clearly are going different ways with the browser and aren’t beholden to them.

    • 0x1C3B00DA@lemmy.ml
      2·
      2 years ago

      I don’t have a problem with that either, if:

      1. It doesn’t affect Firefox’s direction (which it doesn’t look to me like it does)
      2. The user can remove it and provide alternatives.

      The second one is in issue. Removing it is easy enough but Mozilla keeps making adding and using alternatives harder. They removed OpenSearch support so there’s no way to automatically add a new search engine; you have to manually find the query url and convert it into a template string. That’s a ridiculous thing to ask a user to do and exactly what OpenSearch was meant to solve. They also made it harder to use your alternative search engines, especially on mobile where you have to tap through sections of the new tab page

      • d-RLY?@lemmy.ml
        1·
        2 years ago

        I agree with your point about it being weird to auto-add search engines that aren’t Google/Bing/Yahoo/DDG. But I will say that (while it does randomly get frustrating) the lack of automatically adding search engines is a plus for non-tech users. I say this due to the absurd amount of client computers I work on. Obviously them somehow installing extensions that change the search and home pages will still happen (and does).

        But Chrome is one of the worst (though Safari is apparently super susceptible to really nasty search hijackers/re-directors that get in deep af) about scamy/spamy search engines getting added and setup (many times even lists the name of the search in the selection list as being one of the big ones including Google). Also see massive lists of such engines ready to add as “discovered”. Where as it is super unlikely for FF to be hit by non-extension engines being set as defaults. It is of course impossible to fully protect everyone, and it is dumb to stop users that are vigilant of this stuff from being able to take off the training wheels.

        I am just saying that from a dealing with this really specific situation I see everyday FF is doing well. Also being fair I find the DDG Bangs (and the same feature on Brave Search) to be better than just adding all the search engines. I just wish they (Mozilla) would make an extension that could do the same thing. No need to install really more than one default if you can just add a small variable at the beginning.