41–50 of 56 posts
Are there no people that work for Mozilla or Firefox?
If you are here, please keep telling the people above you that users will pay for the browser and the browser alone.
> My new tab window should have no advertisements in it, because you are a nonprofit. "Non-profit" doesn't mean that money magically appears out of nothing. > pushed me ever closer to just giving up and going to Chrome, where at least they exploit me in predictable ways. Chrome is worse, and the ways are much more intrusive. They aren't even predictable. If people keep attacking Firefox like that, there won't be any…
> "Non-profit" doesn't mean that money magically appears out of nothing. It appears already from Google's pockets. First why dont they try to be lean instead of shoving ads to users all year long? How many millionaire execs do you need to run a non-profit?
Mozilla is in a tough spot. An ad for their VPN might be amongst the least bad options they have. Mozilla plays an important role in providing platform diversity. Any user that wants Mozilla to succeed but protests by using a WebKit based browser is achieving only a pyrrhic victory.
Mozilla would be in a much less tough spot if they didn't keep rearranging their deckchairs every six months, and actually let us fund the browser team directly.
> So let me be really clear: STOP PUTTING ADS IN THE GOD DAMNED WEB BROWSER! I DON'T WANT YOUR VPN! I WILL NEVER WANT YOUR VPN! YES. How can Mozilla be so out of touch? Do they not understand the fact people use their browser because it supports uBlock Origin? We need to repeat this loud and clear until they get it.
I use Firefox. I don't use an ad blocker, but I do use Firefox's tracking protection, and first party isolation. If Mozilla doesn't track with this ad, I'm _okay_ with it.
Why not?
Mozilla is in a tough spot. An ad for their VPN might be amongst the least bad options they have. Mozilla plays an important role in providing platform diversity. Any user that wants Mozilla to succeed but protests by using a WebKit based browser is achieving only a pyrrhic victory.
I was there when the Netscape source was released and stated building the same day. I followed the burgeoning Mozilla project from the start and have used first Netscape, then Phoenix, then Firebird, then Firefox and every now and then Seamonkey ever since. I want there to be a strong competitor to Blink (the engine behind Chromium) but I think it has become clear that Mitchell is not the right person to lead this project, being more interested in politics and progressive causes than keeping the competition at bay. Mozilla needs to scale down its organisation and focus on those aspects, creating a number of interoperating projects and products which can compete with Chromium and the infrastructure - sync etc - behind it. Those projects should be platform-neutral and not reliant on central hosting, i.e. it should be possible to easily self-host a Mozilla auth/sync server. Given those conditions Mozilla could become a key component of the drive towards a more decentralised internet.
Get rid of Mitchell and her lackeys and use her copious remuneration (more than $3.000.000) to hire 10 to 20 full-time engineers, set them on this task and get that ball rolling.
[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplat...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use Firefox. I don't use an ad blocker, but I do use Firefox's tracking protection, and first party isolation. If Mozilla doesn't track with this ad, I'm _okay_ with it.
> I don't use an ad blocker Why not?
Benefit: Removing ads isn't much of a benefit for me, since having tracking protection and first party isolation.
Cost: Ads blocker require high privilege permissions that I choose not to grant.
> My new tab window should have no advertisements in it, because you are a nonprofit. "Non-profit" doesn't mean that money magically appears out of nothing. > pushed me ever closer to just giving up and going to Chrome, where at least they exploit me in predictable ways. Chrome is worse, and the ways are much more intrusive. They aren't even predictable. If people keep attacking Firefox like that, there won't be any…
I'd normally agree with you, but Firefox has so many knobs in the about:config and they change often enough (and e.g new ones appear) that it's a game of constant surprise, thinking you turned off all of x, only to find something very similar popped up somewhere else and you didn't know about it because it's a buried about:config preference
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't use an ad blocker Why not?
The cost-benefit isn't there for me. Benefit: Removing ads isn't much of a benefit for me, since having tracking protection and first party isolation. Cost: Ads blocker require high privilege permissions that I choose not to grant.
Why not? I'm genuinely curious... The web feels completely different without ad blockers, at least to me.
> Ads blocker require high privilege permissions that I choose not to grant.
That is perfectly understandable. I agree with you. I think these blockers should be built into the browser themselves in order to eliminate this problem. Sadly, conflicts of interest prevent that. Firefox is funded by Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crazy concept but what if you just paid for the browser then?
I'd love to pay for Firefox. Not Mozilla or anything else. Just the Firefox team. Can I?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd love to pay for Firefox. Not Mozilla or anything else. Just the Firefox team. Can I?
Here's one way to support them. https://fpn.firefox.com/