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

651–660 of 851 posts

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#651

Post by xedrac »

adverbly wrote: post #648
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'm not sure it's that uncharitable... The original quote was apparently said without an understanding of the customer base as if ad blockers were not a core piece of their value proposition. This person doesn't understand their customer if they think it's going to bring in more money to cut ad blockers... It would bring in far less money because they would lose most of their customer base. It's not off mission: it's…

I would go as far to say that ad blockers are the primary value proposition of Firefox at this point. If they lose that, I have little reason to use it on my phone or my workstations.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#652

Post by DonHopkins »

sltkr wrote: post #594
pseudalopex wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eich was fired Eich resigned. > private political views Donations are public material support. Not private views.

We both know that CEOs are never fired, but there is a difference between resigning on their own accord and “resigning” because they had no organizational support. What happened to Eich was the CEO-equivalent of getting fired. > Donations are public material support. Not private views. Not really? Nobody would know what causes Eich donates to if they didn't make an effort to look it up and broadcast that information.…

[flagged]

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#653

Post by xedrac »

drfolgers wrote: post #629
9cb14c1ec0 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The web is unusable without a proper Adblock. It's a privacy nightmare as well. Few people reason how much data they give away to a host of shady companies just by letting ads display.

Ads and page level analytics aren’t the only thing gathering data. There is server-side now (and previously) hosted by the site owner. It’s a lost cause to fight this. I admire you all for using FF because uBO just for the experience, but it’s only a partial data block. Serverside and thumbprinting- you can’t be anonymous even with Tor, VPN, etc.

Any privacy benefits of blocking ads are incidental compared to the usability improvements it brings. I have near zero tolerance for ads.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#654

Post by vee-kay »

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.

Firefox on Android mobile is also useful because it allows extensions - especially uBlock Origin (UBO), Ghostery, No script, etc. Some mobile browsers (e.g., Samsung Internet) used to allow extensions also, but they've become crap or dropped such support, so their usage has fallen.

I like Firefox (for safety) and Vivaldi (Chromium browser, it's easier to use) on Android mobile. On iOS, Safari is simple and sufficient, but I would prefer UBO there, however we all know Apple will never allow extensions for Safari.

Ever since Google moved to Manifest v3, Chrome is a no go.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#655

Post by throwaway613745 »

glenstein wrote: post #503
throwaway613745 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have used Firefox as my default browser through thick and thin for damn near two decades. If Mozilla killed andblocking extensions I’d switch to Helium Browser in a heartbeat since they’re maintaining manifest v2 support for uBO and even ship it OOTB. The web is unusable without a proper Adblock.

>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…

Constantly Fantasizing? I was responding to a hypothetical based on interpretations of real statements made by the new CEO. It's a public forum for discussion. Firefox is something that is central and essential to my digital life.

I think the only person fantasizing here is you, about what random strangers on discussion forums do all day when not responding directly to topics at hand.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#656

Post by unethical_ban »

Isn't it kind of telling how incredibly complicated modern web browsing is, that a web browser is seen as one of the most difficult general purpose projects a developer could imagine building, aside from an entire desktop environment or a kernel?

You know what would be neat? If the Gemini protocol were slightly expanded for video/image embeds, and then having Firefox/Ladybird support it out of the box.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#657

Post by cgfjtynzdrfht »

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…

[dead]

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#658

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

throwaway613745 wrote: post #300
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.

I have used Firefox as my default browser through thick and thin for damn near two decades. If Mozilla killed andblocking extensions I’d switch to Helium Browser in a heartbeat since they’re maintaining manifest v2 support for uBO and even ship it OOTB. The web is unusable without a proper Adblock.

"The web is unusable without a proper Adblock"

Unusable for the commenter perhaps, based on his choices, but not unusable in an absolute sense

For example, I have been using the web without an adblock for several decades.^1 I see no ads

Adblocking is only necessary when one uses a popular graphical web browser

When I use an HTTP generator and a TCP client then no "adblock" is necessary

When I use a text-only browser then no "adblock" is necessary

Websites that comprise "the web" are only one half of the ad delivery system

The other half is the client Firefox is controlled and distribuited by an entity that advocates for a "healthy online advertising ecosystem" and sends search query data to an online advertising services company called Google in exchange for payment. Ex-Mozilla employees left to join Google and start another browser called "Chrome"

These browsers are designed to deliver advertising. That's why an "adblock" extension is needed

When one uses a client that is not controlled and distributed by a company that profits from advertising services, that is not designed to deliver advertising, then an "adblock" may not be needed. I also control DNS and use a local forward proxy

The web is "usable" with such clients. For example, I read all HN submissions using clients that do not deliver or display ads. I am submitting this comment without using a popular graphical web browser

1. Obviously there are some exceptions, e.g., online banking, e-commerce, etc. For me, this is a small minority of web usage

The web is usuable with a variety of clients, not only the ones designed to deliver ads

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#659

Post by SirMaster »

throwaway613745 wrote: post #300
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.

I have used Firefox as my default browser through thick and thin for damn near two decades. If Mozilla killed andblocking extensions I’d switch to Helium Browser in a heartbeat since they’re maintaining manifest v2 support for uBO and even ship it OOTB. The web is unusable without a proper Adblock.

>The web is unusable without a proper Adblock.

And yet somehow most people in the world use it every day without an adblocker...

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#660

Post by eudamoniac »

DonHopkins wrote: post #652
sltkr wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We both know that CEOs are never fired, but there is a difference between resigning on their own accord and “resigning” because they had no organizational support. What happened to Eich was the CEO-equivalent of getting fired. > Donations are public material support. Not private views. Not really? Nobody would know what causes Eich donates to if they didn't make an effort to look it up and broadcast that information.…

[flagged]

>It's your own fault you lost this argument because you decided to attempt such a pathetically transparent lie, and you can't back-pedal enough to make up for that. Face it, you're just a dishonest bigot on the wrong side of history, still salty that gay marriage is finally legal, impotent to do anything about it besides being a lying keyboard warrior troll.

>I hope for your own family's sake that your own straight marriage isn't so fragile that it was undermined by gay marriage being legal, as Brendan's and other homophobic bigot's tired arguments claim is the insidious threat of gay marriage.

>Maybe you made bad life choices and want to punish people who didn't, but that's on you, so don't take it out on gay people, even if you're one of the jealous hateful closeted self loathing ones yourself.

This is a particularly egregious post that I think warrants more intervention than just a flag @dang. This user has been doing this quite a lot, over a period of many months, if you search his posts for the word "Eich" or "bigot".

Post reply on HN