41–50 of 310 posts
What am i missing if i go to , search for "telemetry" and set everything to false?
Are there drawbacks to blocking the hostname incoming.telemetry.mozilla.org in Pi-hole?
Why are there not more successful forks of Firefox? While it's still my browser of choice, I think it's safe to say there are a significant number of developers who are not happy with the leadership of Mozilla. What's preventing other forks from taking off?
Maintaining a successful project takes A LOT of work. For something this size it’s not a side projects amount of work. How do the people working on it get money to cover their bills? If they don’t have this they will work on something that does that. A financial model is usually the blocker. Consider this, a lot of the people who work on Linux or many other projects are corporate backed. The companies pay the develop…
Why are there not more successful forks of Firefox? While it's still my browser of choice, I think it's safe to say there are a significant number of developers who are not happy with the leadership of Mozilla. What's preventing other forks from taking off?
Otherwise if it's just on a whim of the lead dev, that often does not scale. And we've seen with lots of projects, that actual regular-user feedback, not power-users, is crucial in taking those decisions. Switching off telemetry is easy, but I suppose you also have concerns about technical issues, and those can be really difficult to compromise on (a lot of people suggested forks when XUL was removed.. but today probably very few people would want XUL back).
To have a successful fork, you need devs with either a business model behind it, or enough motivation to maintain it as a hobby. For a while, it worked for Iceweasel, but it was just branding. Firefox is complex, requires a lot resources to build, distribute binaries, etc.
I'm not affiliated to Mozilla, but I do help maintain another open source project, where, in my opinion, power-users and consultants drove the project in a direction that made the product more difficult to use, and therefore gave it a bad reputation and limited growth. I can say that because I have access to some of the telemetry, and also because I talk to a lot of random users as part of my work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not thrilled with every decision Mozilla has ever made but I think people have gotten so used to the unlimited resources that Apple, Microsoft, and Google are able to pour into their unprofitable ecosystem moats that they've lost sight of what running a self sustaining business in this space would even look like.
> they've lost sight of what running a sustainable business in this space would look like Is the claim that it is economically impossible to create a browser without turning it in to surveillance malware? To the extent that's true, it is the best argument yet for shutting down the web.
1. The Mozilla developers who are capturing telemetry, but probably just using it to push ads (at worst, and possibly not even that).
2. Some new devs who may have good intentions, but who are unknown to me, who are not capturing telemetry, but nevertheless have control over my browser.
https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community/settings/-/blob/maste...
I was wondering how they could instantly patch nightly builds and this seems to be the approach. Good idea and nice to have a build pipeline that allows tweaking Firefox to this degree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not thrilled with every decision Mozilla has ever made but I think people have gotten so used to the unlimited resources that Apple, Microsoft, and Google are able to pour into their unprofitable ecosystem moats that they've lost sight of what running a self sustaining business in this space would even look like.
> they've lost sight of what running a sustainable business in this space would look like Is the claim that it is economically impossible to create a browser without turning it in to surveillance malware? To the extent that's true, it is the best argument yet for shutting down the web.
In case it is, really, shut down the web? What would that look like? Why would we do it? How? How can “browsers are expensive” possibly be worth doing something that extreme?
How is this any different from a standard Firefox install with telemetry turned off
Hopefully it's a lot different. If you proxy Firefox you'll see that even with everything turned off that you possibly can through the UI, Firefox phones home many times, especially during launch and exit.
For what it's worth, some of the startup checks are to see whether the user is on a public wifi with a captive portal, and talk to a Mozilla service rather than Google. Other checks are for upgrades, or Firefox Sync, if enabled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet we see quite a lot of Chromium forks - Brave, Vivaldi and Edge come to mind. For Firefox, the number seems to be a lot lower.
> Brave Company trying to make money off of its fork. > Vivaldi Company trying to ??? > Edge Microsoft, who found that maintaining a chrome fork would be less expensive than playing catch-up with their own in-house browser .
> This is for Debian Unstable only - do not try to install this package on any other branch of Debian or Ubuntu/Mint..
When I see a "Debian based" installer, I would expect it to work on at least some type of OS apart from Debian. That header should really say - Debian Unstable installer, not a "Debian based" installer.