Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

ghacks.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 480 posts

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#471

Post by igorfortyfour »

ex_mozilla wrote: post #451
WhyNotHugo wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry about the shit that went down. It makes me mad and I'm just a user, I can't image what it feels like for someone who put years of hard work into it. Do you or any or your former colleagues still have the energy or will to work on a real user-centric, stable, privacy-first browser for the masses? Do you think there's hope of developers potentially wanting to work on an organised fork or something along those…

I actually think that, a few of us would be totally willing to build a new strong, fast and privacy centric browser. Some absolutely incredible ideas have been discussed about a potential new engine (Servo based) that could be privacy-first / lightweight / fast / bloat-free. This would require rethinking the web in a retro-compatible way, and here again I've heard of some very smart ideas. … but who's gonna lead that…

Personally, I'd be willing to pay a per-user licensing fee for such a browser if it was the real deal.

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#472

Post by igorfortyfour »

grey_earthling wrote: post #446
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Making tools and services for public use is always political Why and how? If I need a hammer, should I care what opinions the guy making it has, as long as he is making (and striving to) make good hammers? Trying to politicize every single seems to be part of the problem here. We're almost at the point where you can't buy a hammer. You can either buy a LGBTQ hammer or a anti-LGBTQ hammer, even though all you care a…

Perhaps the word “tool” was misplaced. For something like a hammer that you can buy once and then just use, the manufacturer's corporate personality isn't really relevant, yeah. But for goods and services where you're (perhaps tacitly) entering an ongoing relationship with the manufacturer — like software, which requires maintenance — the company's reputation is important, and it reflects on the values of the consume…

I guarantee that at least 15-25% of the population finds same-sex marriage morally reprehensible and that Mozilla is alienating an enormous number of current or potential users with its woke ideology. Is flipping the bird to the conservative half of the electorate good for business?

Maybe corporate virtue signaling appeals to you but it repulses me. Given the choice between a company that supports far-left causes and one that remains politically neutral, I would, all other things being equal, always go with the latter.

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#473

Post by knighthack »

grey_earthling wrote: post #450
knighthack wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the solution you're describing is: apply public posturing to appease the mob, and highlight the queer/LGBT-positive stance of the company (while disregarding the importance of its engineers, given that Mozilaa is a tech company first, not a social justice company)? Since when have a "good fraction of their user base", i.e. of Mozilla's, been the queer and LGBT community?

> apply public posturing to appease the mob, and highlight the queer/LGBT-positive stance of the company I'm not suggesting public posturing. I'm suggesting sincerity. > given that Mozilaa is a tech company first, not a social justice company I don't accept that premise. ~20 years ago, Mozilla was primarily about empowering all ordinary people to make full use of the web. They talked about their mission rather than p…

> Always. Depending on where you get your numbers from, around 15% to 25% of people are LGBTQ+.

I would love sources for that statement, otherwise I will have to call bunk.

We're talking about a global population of Firefox users.

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#474

Post by vlark »

SllX wrote: post #231
vlark wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some folks object to the Brave Rewards system and the embedded crypto wallet.

I just disabled all of that. No Chromium browser is my main browser but when I need one, Brave seems like the best option. If you were to pick between Brave, Vivaldi and I dunno, maybe Edge, just for when you need Chrome-compatibility and pretty much no other reason, which one would you pick and why?

Vivaldi. Like Firefox, it has cross-system syncing (Windows, MacOS, Linux -- including Android & Raspberry Pi).

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#475

Post by NylaTheWolf »

bigbugbag wrote: post #373
rackjack wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What're the alternatives to Firefox? The only ones that come to mind are Opera and Brave, and Brave had some controversy too.

waterfox and librewolf. then otter, seamonkey, falkon, k-meleon, srware iron, qutebrowser, comodo dragon and comodo icedragon, dooble, midori, epic. not sure if maxthon and Avant Browser are still a thing

I always thought Otter was just a mobile browser! Thanks for sharing! I love hearing about obscure browsers!

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#476

Post by WhyNotHugo »

ex_mozilla wrote: post #451
WhyNotHugo wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry about the shit that went down. It makes me mad and I'm just a user, I can't image what it feels like for someone who put years of hard work into it. Do you or any or your former colleagues still have the energy or will to work on a real user-centric, stable, privacy-first browser for the masses? Do you think there's hope of developers potentially wanting to work on an organised fork or something along those…

I actually think that, a few of us would be totally willing to build a new strong, fast and privacy centric browser. Some absolutely incredible ideas have been discussed about a potential new engine (Servo based) that could be privacy-first / lightweight / fast / bloat-free. This would require rethinking the web in a retro-compatible way, and here again I've heard of some very smart ideas. … but who's gonna lead that…

> And where will the money come from?

There are organizations that give grants for open source development that impact people, and a browser seems like an extraordinary good fit, e.g.: https://nlnet.nl/

Additional, asking individual users for funding is very wise (like what Signal is doing[1]). Sending a clear message of why funding is needed is also important. I'd personally be willing to put some recurring funds into this, and I'm sure many other people in tech would care about this too -- pretty much the same of us that are pissed at where Firefox is heading.

I care about this subject a lot, I'd be interested in corresponding with people with the actual expertise to work on it, want to shoot me an email? hugo at whynothugo.nl

[1]: https://signal.org/blog/become-a-signal-sustainer/

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#477

Post by WhyNotHugo »

igorfortyfour wrote: post #471
ex_mozilla wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think that, a few of us would be totally willing to build a new strong, fast and privacy centric browser. Some absolutely incredible ideas have been discussed about a potential new engine (Servo based) that could be privacy-first / lightweight / fast / bloat-free. This would require rethinking the web in a retro-compatible way, and here again I've heard of some very smart ideas. … but who's gonna lead that…

Personally, I'd be willing to pay a per-user licensing fee for such a browser if it was the real deal.

See my reply to gp: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776943

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#478

Post by ideologysec »

VexorLoophole wrote: post #285
busymom0 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I changed my default browser few days ago back to Safari. In Firefox, I would usually click the first two items on the home page which would be photopea or reddit. That day, they put 2 sponsored items for Amazon and Trivago instead at the first 2 spots and I accidentally clicked the amazon one without realizing because that first item was supposed to be Photopea. That was enough to piss me off: https://i.imgur.com/s7…

What do you use for adblocking on safari?

1Blocker is pretty good, especially if you use iOS (syncs rules, etc). Not free, though. Worth it to turn off annoyances IMHO.

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#479

Post by webspinner »

laurent92 wrote: post #458
account42 wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole organization is dying while the CEO gets raises.

Well, they did fire the Christian CEO.

Well he did step down, he still didn't deserve all the ridiculousness that went on, though. glad he was able to make something good out of it.

Re: Each Firefox download has a unique identifier

#480

Post by ex_mozilla »

WhyNotHugo wrote: post #476
ex_mozilla wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think that, a few of us would be totally willing to build a new strong, fast and privacy centric browser. Some absolutely incredible ideas have been discussed about a potential new engine (Servo based) that could be privacy-first / lightweight / fast / bloat-free. This would require rethinking the web in a retro-compatible way, and here again I've heard of some very smart ideas. … but who's gonna lead that…

> And where will the money come from? There are organizations that give grants for open source development that impact people, and a browser seems like an extraordinary good fit, e.g.: https://nlnet.nl/ Additional, asking individual users for funding is very wise (like what Signal is doing[1]). Sending a clear message of why funding is needed is also important. I'd personally be willing to put some recurring funds in…

Browser engineers are expensive. And we need a lot of those. And before leaving their current well paying job, they need the insurance that a potential people-funded contract won't die off after 2 years.

Hard.

Post reply on HN