Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 93

mozilla.org

211–220 of 235 posts

Re: Firefox 93

#211
post #2

How are downloads performed over http "potentially malicious"?

Mozilla is foolish to buy into Google's bad faith attempt to create barriers to entry for small/old sites and further centralize the web.

Encrypting web traffic is a necessary step in making dragnet surveillance impossible.

Re: Firefox 93

#212

I'd love to move to FF, but it has a virtual desktop bug dating back to 2007 [0], which is a showstopper for me. When reopening FF, e.g., after restarting Win or Linux, all FF windows are restored to a single virtual desktop, even if they were on different desktops previously. Chromium-based browsers don't seem to have this problem. They tried fixing it a few times [1,2], but the bug persists, and I am not aware of a…

All the bugs you linked are marked as fixed, so unless you open a new bug with clear steps of reproducing your specific issue, it's probably never going to happen.

Re: Firefox 93

#213
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mitchell Baker (Mozilla CEO) makes 3 million a year. It's actually very profitable for a nonprofit organization, isn't it? "On the same period, Firefox marketshare was down 85%. When asked about her salary she stated "I learned that my pay was about an 80% discount to market. Meaning that competitive roles elsewhere were paying about 5 times as much. That's too big a discount to ask people and their families to commi…

i find the role of a "ceo" in mozilla as offensive as anything. for that matter any "management" role because it should be devs earning a buck while building cool software. nothing more, no paper pushing "managers" and ceos. why does mozilla need them anyways? who is forcing them to have one?

Mozilla needs a CEO for the same reason all companies need one. I find it disappointing how people grill open source or charity projects over spending money on management or marketing like it’s a waste. Do you think every other company spends this money just for fun? Or that it actually provides value to the business and helps them succeed?

Re: Firefox 93

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they're not really enforceable because cash is fungible.

There are several legal precedents that say otherwise. Regardless, when you give money to a charity with a restriction or designation and they accept the money but ignore your request that generally doesn't go over well.

Sounds like they could use your money on Firefox but then allocate less of their own money to it so the result is the same.

Re: Firefox 93

#215
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean the container format, AVIF uses it natively. If you mean the image format, probably never. It's based on the HEVC/H.265 licensing minefield. For that reason, I don't expect it to ever be supported on Chromium or Firefox based browsers.

Hmm, I have no issues viewing the files (iPhone pictures) on my Ubuntu desktop, are they that much braver?

Yes. You probably have the extra codecs package added which is arguably illegal to distribute in the US. Other distros like Fedora won’t touch it.

Re: Firefox 93

#216
post #51
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Give me a way to pay for Firefox, please, and use the proceeds to hire a full development team that can hopefully catch up and overtake Chrome? Please? Best we can do is spending the money on women who code outreach. Not sure what that has to do with web browsers, but I'm sure the CEO who managed to lose 80% market share knows better than me.

This chart is very telling [1] from [2]. [1]: https://calpaterson.com/assets/mozilla-boss-pay.svg [2]: https://calpaterson.com/mozilla.html

Really depressing; our last chance at browser diversity and keeping the fate of the web out of Google's hands is being run by a white collar thief

Re: Firefox 93

#217
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dropbox quietly replaces the insides of JPGs with a better compression system (lossless change) to save their storage costs, and then returns it to normal when the file is read. (It may be they do a JPEG XL transform, for all I can remember about the article which explained it). I wouldn't be too surprised if every big CDN already does something like that internally as a competitive advantage, and if so then the ince…

Aren't the biggest costs from bandwidth, not storage? I'm sure they would love to reduce data transmission by 20% for browsers that support it.

CDNs would love to bill customers 20% less for bandwidth used? Customers will be able to move to storing JPEG XL files on CDNs and reduce their own storage and bandwidth costs, but I was responding to the claim that it would be in CDN's interest to hurry the transition, and I think it will be a loss for CDNs.

Re: Firefox 93

#219
post #17

Give me a way to pay for Firefox, please, and use the proceeds to hire a full development team that can hopefully catch up and overtake Chrome? Please?

This. Only paying for a browser aligns the incentives of the browser company and the user. As long as customer of the browser != user of the browser, there is ample opportunity for conflict of interest.

Re: Firefox 93

#220
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'd comment more, but the inevitable flagging that's coming up is really killing my interest in anything but one line quips.

You got it backwards. It's the hostile one line quips making you get flagged.

No.
Post reply on HN