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

Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

infosec.press

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 851 posts

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#561

Post by mancerayder »

JoeJonathan wrote: post #226
nialv7 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interpretation is not the problem. Whether he will do it, is actually secondary to the fact that he thinks cutting adblock can bringing in money. No, it will just kill the browser. The fact he thinks otherwise tells me how out of touch he is.

Like many others, the ability to run uBO is the main reason I use Firefox. Otherwise I'd use Chrome or Safari.

Is Brave so persona-non-grata? I find that it's a 'don't ask don't tell' because of some ancient politics. If Firefox is becoming suspect, WHAT is left?

I found Chrome+adblockers NOT good enough. I like (and hate) Brave's shield, as I never figured out how to use wildcards to whitelist a whole domain / subdomain, it seems per-host. But that Brave shield WORKS.

Now people are going back to Chrome? Really?

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#562

Post by 2b3a51 »

glenstein wrote: post #520
derbOac wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading comments here about problems using Firefox is odd to me as I never run into them. I feel like people are taking about totally different browsers. I don't remember the last time I had page rendering issues or was asked to use a different browser.

Same. I mean, I'm sure there have been cases where I've switched to Chrome for certain things. I just got a custom viewfinder for my partner for Christmas, is showing a bunch of photos of the cruise that we went on. And they have an online editor for it, but the editor seemed to be glitching when using Firefox. So I moved to Chrome. Later I realized I was just misunderstanding and it actually just worked fine in Fire…

Most of the service sites I use are fine in Firefox running on Linux. The only thing I use that is problematic is the Microsoft 365 with Teams portal an employer uses. So I have Chromium just for that one.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#563

Post by glenstein »

matthewkayin wrote: post #512
glenstein wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If Mozilla killed andblocking extensions Yeah but they haven't and they're not going to, so what's the point of fantasizing about what you would do in that situation? It's like tough guy syndrome, where a person constantly fantasizes about what they would do in the imaginary situation where one of their friends or family is disrespected, or doomsday preppers who spend their life imagining what they would do in an ap…

Relax, man. It's perfectly reasonable to say that you would stop using a browser if they killed adblock support. Saying so is not "tough guy" syndrome because switching which browser you use is not a tough thing to do.

It is tough guy syndrome, because it's projecting a hypothetical scenario to performatively declare what you would do in that hypothetical, attempting to hold a third party accountable for something they're not actually doing. Try to follow the ball instead of lecturing me to relax ;)

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#564

Post by pseudalopex »

sltkr wrote: post #541
i80and wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah no, (1) Mozilla was going to be in for a tough go no matter what; I don't think Eich would have fared any better. But (2) you can't donate to stop your own employees and users from having civil rights without repercussions. People with an axe to grind always hide what Brendan Eich did behind "politics" which is a dishonest slight of hand.

> Yeah no, (1) Mozilla was going to be in for a tough go no matter what; I don't think Eich would have fared any better. Nobody knows this for sure. We do know that Eich was fired for political reasons, and not because of his technological direction. This betrays a decision making process that prioritizes political correctness above leadership qualities and technical contributions. > you can't donate to stop your own…

> Eich was fired

Eich resigned.

> private political views

Donations are public material support. Not private views.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#566

Post by eqvinox »

mancerayder wrote: post #561
JoeJonathan wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like many others, the ability to run uBO is the main reason I use Firefox. Otherwise I'd use Chrome or Safari.

Is Brave so persona-non-grata? I find that it's a 'don't ask don't tell' because of some ancient politics. If Firefox is becoming suspect, WHAT is left? I found Chrome+adblockers NOT good enough. I like (and hate) Brave's shield, as I never figured out how to use wildcards to whitelist a whole domain / subdomain, it seems per-host. But that Brave shield WORKS. Now people are going back to Chrome? Really?

The crypto bullshit Brave was (and somehow still is) pulling is way worse than Firefox's enshittificAItion.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#567

Post by soulofmischief »

the_af wrote: post #352
immibis wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most adblocker developers throughout history have routinely taken millions of dollars to weaken their adblockers, though. That's why we're all using uBO instead of uB.

Not the same author.

Incorrect, Raymond Hill authored both extensions, both being forks of HTTP Switchboard.

Raymond got overwhelmed with managing an open source project of uBlock's size and let Chris Aljoudi take over. Adblock later purchased it from Chris.

Meanwhile, Raymond had forked uBlock, creating uBO, and continued to improve it on his own terms. After seeing what happened with Adblock, he has no intention of selling either uMatrix or uBO.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#568

Post by ikrenji »

lxgr wrote: post #41

>> He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission. > It may be just me, but I read this as “I don't want to but I'll kill AdBlockers in Firefox for buckerinos ”. Yes, that does seem like a pretty uncharitable interpretation of that quote. I read it as "we won't do it, even though it would bring in $150M US…

I only use Firefox over Chrome because it has adblock. So where does the $150 million comes from if people won't use it without adblock? Seems comrade didn't think this through...

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#569

Post by [deleted] »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #468
miroljub wrote: post #457

The day Mozilla fired Brendan Eich for political reasons, Firefox died. It just took a while for everyone to realise that. That was when they collectively decided that other things are more important to them than the quality and usability of Firefox. The new CEO is just the final nail in their coffin.

I don't know, if the CEO of some software I used suddenly came out as anti-miscegenation, and started donating money to the cause, I'd stop using the software until the CEO was fired too.

[deleted]

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#570

Post by immibis »

mghackerlady wrote: post #513
t23414321 wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The web was usable without JavaScript once. (JS has few good uses, but is too excessive. Less code is always better - and an art.)

Is there an extension that limits JS to things that actually improve websites (like the bare minimum needed to render a page usable under most metrics)

NoScript, but you can only control it per domain.
Post reply on HN