Live data from Hacker News

Leaving Mozilla

blog.unitedheroes.net

191–200 of 346 posts

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#191
Firefox leadership had a recovery the time when Brendan Eich was CEO, then he was kicked out.

since then it has been downhill since.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#192
post #108

I really wish Mozilla would focus relentlessly on a privacy-first, performant browser across major platforms. Nothing else. I don’t want extensions (attack vector), vpns, fancy bookmarking services that are deprecated later on etc. I want to browse the web safely and privately and preserve battery life - nothing more.

100%. Browsers are considered a commodity but I'd happily pay for a browser that:

1. Could do all the stuff chrome does as well as chrome. (Eg, canvas rendering speed etc). So I can actually use web apps.

2. Just doesn't ever have anti privacy code, pro ad code, etc in it.

I use brave and a self managed lan which is just an ad hoc half assed attempt to reach the above goals. Because there is no other option.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#193

Interesting to read, but ultimately it's very easy to blame "leaders" for everything and I'm not sure it has much merit. It's popular to pile on them and their decisions. But I don't think it's as obvious as people (often here on HN) make it out to be. If Mozilla didn't try out these avenues deemed wrong, if Mozilla spent all money on the browser only, if Mozilla made the best browser ever, would that really make a d…

> it's very easy to blame "leaders" for everything and I'm not sure it has much merit.

Leaders are accountable for their decisions, their statements, their strategies, and their care for the organisation(s) that they lead.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#194
post #108

I really wish Mozilla would focus relentlessly on a privacy-first, performant browser across major platforms. Nothing else. I don’t want extensions (attack vector), vpns, fancy bookmarking services that are deprecated later on etc. I want to browse the web safely and privately and preserve battery life - nothing more.

I wouldn't want a browser without extensions. Ad blocking in particular.

To me, ad blocking belongs in extensions. The job of a web browser is to show web pages as intended according to the standards. It includes all the ads, tracking, etc... the page has put in. If you want to block stuff or deviate from the standards in any way, that's what extensions are for.

And extension like ad blocking are an arms race, websites will deploy countermeasures to make them less effective and to which extensions can respond. Again I dont want the core browser to participate in an arms race. Keeping it free of vulnerabilities is already hard enough not to fight against standard behavior.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#195
post #7

Some 10 years ago I was a Mozilla volunteer. I mainly worked on MDN, to the point of becoming a so-called "topic driver" for the glossary. Some of the work I did landed in the citations of a couple of papers about web technology. They flew me a whole week to Vancouver for an event where employees and volunteers worked together in the same room and they even made me (and the other volunteers ) attend a sort-of-corpora…

Last I heard the ads were introduced to be less dependent on Google money - they actually cover the costs/salaries of the internal MDN team and thus secure the existence of MDN within the organisation.

Also apparently they are non-tracking ads, and so provide only a small fraction of income that tracking ads would bring, but that would go against the ideals of Mozilla.

So I'm seeing the ads as a net positive. (And am surprised that the people visiting MDN don't use an ad blocker anyhow).

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#196

Respect. This is what Firefox could have been. In the real world, in the same line as the article suggests, there was a brief time when the "puts you back in control" browser needed you to change the following about:config settings to disable the force-pushed ai: browser.ml.enable, browser.ml.chat.enabled, browser.ml.chat.sidebar, browser.ml.chat.menu, browser.ml.chat.page, extensions.ml.enabled, browser.ml.linkPrevi…

I think Mozilla is still mostly made up of tech-optimist people, so they were open and interested in ai from day one. I highly doubt there was any malicious intent.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netsplits, missed messages and bot wars over channel and nick ownership were an integral part of IRC UX, and they were direct consequences the IRC protocol. If Discord was run on top of IRC protocol, it would have the same. Discord would probably be its own network and the people who prefer IRCnet, EFnet or QuakeNet would never touch it.

> Netsplits It's not inherent to the protocol. https://ergo.chat/ does not have netsplits (from having a single server) and https://github.com/Libera-Chat/sable replaces the server-to-server protocol to eliminate netsplits as well. And even when not eliminated entirely, they are infrequent and barely visible on well-managed networks like Libera.Chat. Many chat platforms have more (and longer) outages than Libera has…

So... Usually it's claimed that one of the advantages of IRC is that it doesn't depend on a single server, so using a single server feels a bit like cheating. Replacing the server-to-server protocol sounds a lot like it's not really IRC protocol any more. The chathistory link says "This specification may change at any time and we do not recommend implementing it in a production environment." right on top. And yes, NickServ and ChanServ exist on some networks and IIRC they were one of the major points in debates over which network is the best and which ones to not touch with a ten feet pole. A hypothetical IRC-based Discord-like service could have it.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#198
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't hear any enthusiasts complain about the new VPN integration, which helps fund the browser. A paid email service is also something many have been asking for a while. People even want to donate money for browser development, but can't due to the foundation structure.

> I didn't hear any enthusiasts complain about the new VPN integration, which helps fund the browser. You did not read the comments of this submission?[1] This is common.[2][3][4][5] And those were comments which were easy to find because they said Firefox and VPN. Many other comments said they should focus on Firefox solely. Or eliminate all side projects. > People even want to donate money for browser development,…

> You did not read the comments of this submission?[1] This is common.[2][3][4][5] And those were comments which were easy to find because they said Firefox and VPN.

Fair, there are complaints out there, but I'd rank the response very mild compared to AI and the upcoming Nova design.

> Many other comments said they should focus on Firefox solely. Or eliminate all side projects.

Of course, since most of their money comes from search royalties for having Firefox users.

> People can give money to Mozilla Corporation by purchasing Firefox Relay, Mozilla Monitor, Mozilla VPN, or MDN Plus. Rules for businesses to solicit donations are strict. Mozilla would have to be more careful than most because people confuse non profit Mozilla Foundation and for profit Mozilla Corporation. It is well known in fund raising most people who say they would donate will not donate. And many of the small minority of Firefox users who said they would donate implied or said plainly a condition was Mozilla would abandon other income.

Yes, but what I'm saying is there's no general opposition from "enthusiasts" to Firefox making money like the parent commenter stated. The more popular take I've seen is to support Firefox via paying for VPN, etc.

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is rarely true. If an organization ceases to exist but people still have the same goal then they create a new organization or act individually without an incorporated bureaucracy. On the contrary, the existence of a mismanaged organization nominally dedicated to a given purpose often prevents its nominal goal from being achieved, because people assume giving time or money to that organization will be the best wa…

You think that it is practical for teachers to abolish school districts and create their own?

In the UK we have a variety of arrangements for schools. Some are local authority managed, some are 'academy status' which means that they are self managed but often with a cluster of schools sharing a management layer to save money. There are also 'free schools' which are community run with often an 'alternative' ethos. And there are religious schools, run by churches (and other religious organisations). All of those are state funded using a funding formula, and they have to teach the national curriculum, and are subject to inspections. Academy status schools used to get a bit extra but not any more, they can however employ staff who are not qualified teachers (Qualified Teacher Status is a defined set of training and experience requirements).

There are also private schools (some famously called public schools like Eaton or Harrow, but most actually just private companies often with charitable status).

Schools are usually fairly small organisations and generally the management have risen through the ranks as teachers, year heads, and so on. It isn't a sector in which fortunes are made.

So, yes, I think a range of funding and organisational models are possible. But note the role of regulation (direct inspection of what happens in classrooms on a regular basis without much in the way of warning).

Re: Leaving Mozilla

#200
post #175
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like you couldn't create an IRC-client with better UI than discord. Not as many features, but whatever strength discord has it is not UI. Email really could have been great, but html and bad actors have made it so much worse than it needs to be.

In practice "better UI" would mean things like being able to trivially share files and images, or quote/link a specific message, or even making it easier to distinguish between users with similar nicks via their profile pictures. And those UI improvements are actually features which are integral to its protocol, so they can't easily be bolted on by a custom IRC client in a backwards-compatible way. Literally every si…

Quoting/linking is a client feature, not a server one.

IRC servers do also support profiles.

I think the real “issue” with IRC is that its users generally prefer the minimal UI. So there isn’t an high enough demand to make prettier UIs. But there are web clients that are a little less basic.

For what it’s worth, I’m in that minimal camp too. I wish I could still connect Slack to IRC.

Post reply on HN