Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which, coincidentally, happens to be search-free as well.
which in turn makes it sound like free money from Googs
straight to the mozilla ceo
www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
221–230 of 320 posts
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#222Great screenshot https://camo.githubusercontent.com/16a554571b3cea973d2b73464...
Definitely one of the greatest screenshots that I've ever seen.
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
(I work on WebCompat at Mozilla) There are various people whose job involves triaging issues filed on that repo, and communicating with the issue authors where necessary e.g. to figure out additional steps required to reproduce the reported problem. The point of that effort is exactly because we value reports of site breakage so highly, and want to ensure that people reporting them have a good experience. Unfortunate…
Nah, that's bullshit. If someone interacts with your team on whatever medium you go out of your way to be respectful and shouldn't act like stuck up, condescending neckbeards, whose presence is a gift to humanity. I run many open source repos myself and you can bet that when people take the trouble to interact with me I make it my mission to listen to what they say and treat them with respect. I don't expect them to act like robots and neither should you. The way you've all answered here makes me think that you're a bunch of code monkeys incapable of understanding that software is created for human beings and not machines.
>In this case it seems highly unlikely that anyone can add additional information that will allow a faster resolution
Heaven forbid. Sounds like Mozilla is a wonderful and fun place to work. Lmao.
>of disrupting our normal workflows, and taking attention away from fixing either the problem at hand
People aren't going to die if a few off-topic comments are posted. Holy fuck, what is wrong with you.
>To me that significantly outweighs the potential upside of leaving it open to "make people feel welcome".
That's exactly the problem. Acting like regular users have no worthwhile input is unbelievably out of touch and just plain insufferable. Maybe if you listened more to the user you could build a browser that wasn't such a piece of shit. Lmao.
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#224I work for Google Search. Apologies for this! It’s been fixed now and posted to our search status dashboard https://status.search.google.com/incidents/hySMmncEDZ7Xpaf9i...
Would love to hear what the bug and/or fix was
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
A bit of searching suggests that this individual is the same 'robertsdotpm' who posted that "b-bazinga" comment, or at least is closely associated with them.
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Googlers? Obviously scummy behavior should be highlighted.
> Not sure why you're getting downvoted
People will upvote and downvote on this site as they please, and caring about it is a recipe for a bad time.
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that what you think happened here? Google made the search page blank for Firefox users to get them on Chrome? Or perhaps it's the work of Hanlon's razor.
Considering it has happened time and time again, and this latest one happens just by changing the UA… yes. If it looks like a banana, shaped like a banana, feels like a banana, it’s probably a banana (or a plantain).
Come on, don't sell Google short here. The previous one happened just by changing the UA too :)
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#2279 minutes ago: > Since this has now been posted to HN, I'll be locking this thread. This bugtracker is a work place, not a discussion forum. We have a bad fame.
> ... We have a bad fame. HN is too orange.
I switched it to the same color gray as the background. HN actually provides a pref for this in your user settings.
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#228Submitters: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
If you want to say what you think is important about an article, that's fine, but do it by adding a comment to the thread. Then your view will be on a level playing field with everyone else's: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
(Submitted title was "Google breaks search for Firefox users because of bad UA string sniffing")
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is about a pattern of behaviour that started when Chrome launched (and had less market share than Firefox) and has continued since then. This isn't "They're trying to take our tiny market share", this is "This is how they took our quite substantial market share".
If they already took substantial market share, why would they need tofurther break Firefox users' experience? You just made my point for me.
> why would they need tofurther break Firefox users' experience
To prevent the market share from going up? That's the logical thing to do after spending millions developing and marketing your browser to the number 1 spot.
Why would they waste that money and effort by playing nice now and letting the market share go back up?
Re: www.google.com – The page is blank when accessed
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Next update will be within 12 hours. (From the status page linked above.) That sounds pretty far from being nimble and deploying rapidly. Not really a knock on the people doing the work — doing stuff in high stress sucks. But it's clear that they're intentionally deprioritizing a competitor.
For one, that "deprioritize a competitor" is not clear at all. Why would that be so? Isn't it far more likely, given the rarity of these events, that a test regression occurred or some other subtle issue rather than assumed malfeasance? For two, that "next update in 12 hours" is user comms. For me, at least, google.com works fine both on curl and my browser. That's a fairly normal cadence for big companies. On the la…
I think the parent comment's point is: if this were affecting a version of Google-branded Chrome with similar market share, do you think we would still be getting "next update in 12 hours"?
I remember an internal mantra in Google along the lines of "if you break something in production, roll back first, ask questions about how it happened later, even if you think it's a simple fix". It feels telling that this is not what is happening in this circumstance.