I am shocked. Shocked! /s

  • Nytefyre@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    How defeatist of you, Mozilla. Whatever happened to your pride? Oh, it went a long time ago when you make a big deal about going 3.0 and how you claimed to have improved Firefox’s performance. Been a long time, but Firefox remains ever more the same as it did way back then, just cluttered with more features that weighs it’s performance.

    • Nytefyre@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      They don’t know how to do that and never did.

      It’s always been “Uhhh let’s have people make Firefox accounts, yeah!” When, in this day and age, the last thing people need is yet another account to keep track of.

      “Lets get into AI, yeah!” Said no one ever.

      Like, is it too much to fucking ask for a simple, privacy-centric, security (not overreaching), performance priority browser?

      I mean look around how many forks of Firefox that there are out there, having to do the legwork because Firefox isn’t that much of the shit it thinks it is.

      • abbenm@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’ve never understood the argument. It seems to have kind of been collectively hallucinated into existence by waves of internet comment sections over the years. But these aren’t mutually exclusive, and nobody has made a case that the resources for these other features are compromising the ability to deliver core browser functionality.

        They also seem to assume that it’s development decisions, rather than Google leveraging its search dominance and financial muscle, that are tied to changes in market share. I actually think these value-adds can be good, can punch above their weight and can, if they are smart in picking their spots, do so without necessarily compromising their ability to advance the development of Firefox.

        And nobody ever stops, breathes in and out, collects the evidence and makes the actual case. It’s just kind of assumed, asserted, repeated, assumed again, repeated again ad nauseum. Because enough people have seen other people say it, so they say it too knowing it leads to upvotes.

        The ones closest to citing evidence, thankfully understanding at least how a real argument would actually work, are also the most unhinged, which probably isn’t a coincidence.

        • Nytefyre@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Why would I take the time and energy out of my day to jump through hoops to prove my case. At the very likely chance that someone like you will refute it anyways and waive it off like you did with my comment?

          Not worth it.

      • slacktoid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Will it run locally and use GPU offloading to summarize articles while citing them. Sure why not.

    • Eiri@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      I understand that they need to diversify so that they’re not so dependent on Google’s default search engine money. I don’t know how they should do that.

      But I’m not sure what they’ve been doing has been all that good of an idea.

      • TheFrirish@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        They’re 80% dependent on google there is no choice. Mozilla’s behaviour since they got the google deal was the begining of the end. I honestly believe that due to Mozilla’s current leadership it would be best for open source developers to all refocus on the ladybird project. I don’t have any affiliation to that project and I understand how huge of an undertaking it is to build a web engine from scratch but the gecko engine is polluted by the Mozilla’s execs and by extension Google.

        To make it clear Google controls Firefox by, in practice, owning an 80% share of Mozilla.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        make their browser engine useable for 3rd parties and sell support, make an electron-like product and add premium features… there are so many browser-based products that people sell, and owning 1 of the only viable browser engines should be huge… the fact that firefox is still only barely able to be embedded is a travesty

        it’d be especially valuable if they made a premium electron product that provided security/privacy guarantees, performance benefits, etc - they should siphon some of the profit off the number of for-profit companies that build electron apps

        • Eiri@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          I kinda like the idea but I also kinda hate it.

          I really wish PWAs worked properly cross-platform instead. :(

          • toastal@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            SSB was killed after it sat behind an about:config flag, then their telemetry (that most power users disable) reported folks weren’t using. But what average users would be using a setting they would need to poke around to find. It’s a real shame too since I want to say it was PeppermintOS that was largely built around PWAs.

          • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            totally agree, but also you can do more with an electron-like app - elevated privileges, less sandbox, etc because the user expects such things from an installed “native” app

      • slacktoid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        well paying execs multimillion dollar salaries aint helping thats for sure!

        Also. What’s the point of their mastodon server? It’s cool but so what

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      with how many singular developers managed to do it based on Firefox when Mozilla couldn’t pull their shit together, idk why anyone would still be holding their breath. just switch to a competent fork.

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          that’s what’s i said, but they’re all better functioning than firefox

            • pyre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              but there is a base, and it isn’t good. the forks are. you said you want a good browser. they’re not making it. the forks are good. idk what you’re arguing about.

              • slacktoid@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Most forks take an ESR version and build on top of that. Who is gonna make that ESR base?

                You’re saying the equivalent of ‘I don’t care about the Linux kernel cause Ubuntu is better and everyone should use that’ of arguments.

                Not saying you are literally saying ^

                • pyre@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  have I said anywhere that Firefox should cease to exist or Mozilla shouldn’t do security patches or whatever because i thought we were talking about having a good browser experience.

    • Mwa@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Same,i wish they can make their browser fast and actually private since gecko is slower then chromium (and maybe webkit?) its even worse on windows

    • abbenm@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean there’s just no way around it. And I’m the most unapologetic Mozilla fanboy you will meet. What was the point of making a server if it was going to just die a few months later.

      You need to be in control of your projects and your vision at least enough to know if you can make a credible commitment to the thing you launch. And, like others here, I’m honestly kind of surprised that this, of all things, was too much for Mozilla to handle.

  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t get why, I can’t see this be difficult or costly to run, but then again I have no clue, never ran a Mastodon instance.

    I would assume that it’s not worth the small reach compared to running X / Bluesky / Threads accounts but then again, like I said, the cost must be super small. 🤷

    • LWD@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      If Mozilla doesn’t discontinue a Mastodon server with under 300 people, how will it continue funding the $65 million AI and venture capital investments they’ve been making?! 😬

        • Vincent@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I think “the Fediverse” is generally understood to refer to ActivityPub-based projects, or even more narrowly, “things that can be seen from Mastodon”. At least I understood it as such, even if that’s not technically correct.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I would be mad if this would be next to fall since I use it. I don’t self-host Matrix since it is too expensive being built on a fundamental ‘eventual consistency’ model mirroring all text & attachments for all users in every DM & room to your storage—not to mention the Python implementation server & even the Rust one use much more system resources than other open chat options. It’s the same for Mastodon specifically too which but Ruby this time—with eventual consistency chewing up GiBs of storage making small players shut down instances. I would not be surprised tho if their Matrix server fell next just based on hosting cost.

      Wanting to get folks off proprietary garbage like Slack, Telegram, & Discord was the right idea but moving to Matrix will prove to be a mistake as nodes are too expensive to run therefore leads to the centralization we need to escape. With the poor performance of the flagship Element client too, casual users think it is too damn slow (literally takes 2 minutes to even get to a screen with text in my browser & it isn’t even done syncing). There are more mature technologies with lower running costs that could have/should have/can be embraced.

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Can we all just use a “bad browser” that isn’t “as good” as these exploitative mainstream browsers by specifically giving up on websites that require a browser that exploits us? We shouldn’t need to be exploited.

  • zante@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I guess hating Mozilla is very much in fashion. The tech chatterati have made it so.

    They’ll move on, as they always do. I just hope Firefox is still here.

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Critiquing Mozilla when they make mistakes is not the same as hating them. It is healthy to keep these organizations accountable

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The issue is all signs point to them pivoting to AI and ad driven nonsense - they’ll move on, but if the product goes to shit so will I. The rest is noise.

  • Mwa@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hmm why cant they move to a pre hosted mastodon server

  • CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 months ago

    Does it matter that they don’t run an instance?

    As long as they have accounts and keep them up to date, that is the main thing.

    How many open source projects actually run and moderate instances?

    • LWD@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The effectiveness of the internet as a public resource depends upon interoperability (protocols, data formats, content), innovation and decentralized participation worldwide.

      - Mozilla Manifesto, Principle 6, emphasis mine

      • CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So how does not running a virtual soapbox that is niche and most do not care about affect the public’s ability to participate in the internet from where they are?

        I’m not sure if you didn’t understand the point or are cherry picking words to satiate your feelings?

        • LWD@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because if Mozilla can’t practice what it preaches, while it spews $65 million of venture capital at AI companies, something is wrong.

          And I’m not cherry picking words, I’m responding to your question with their answer: centralization and non-interoperability are problems, and decentralization with interoperable protocols is the answer they propose.

          Btw, I scanned through some of your posts and noticed you aren’t a fan of AI either. While running this little social network and GenAI do not have to be mutually exclusive, Steve Teixeira was fired because he refused to “innovate” in GenAI and, if I recall correctly, Mozilla.social was one of his projects.

          You might not care about the lives of birds, but if a canary in the coal mine dies…

          Something is wrong.

          • CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            They do not propose them for the internet, simply opting out of hosting Mastodon. A glorified look at me RSS feed with built in validation (likes). They’re not even suggesting they’ll move away from posting on it. You probably guessed I never really liked xitter so the alternative is quite meaningless to me. I just want a browser not run by Google.

            I do not believe in GenAI and do believe it’ll fail. I do not believe I’m guaranteed to be right. Folk seem to like confidently incorrect answers and are hooked on them. Mozilla need to diversify their revenue streams and maybe they get it right. If users expect that integration, and rivals do it, then they will perceive it as rubbish and not use it or move to it, which could be a failure.

            I do not know this Steve chap, but I do know devs are asked to work on stuff and if they refuse, they’re not doing their job. In that case, you do it, or leave. He got fired and ultimately if he wasn’t running it, they even find someone else (was there anyone willing?) or can it. It got canned. No dev really chooses their workload, just how they go about it.

            It’s less suspicious than you want it to be.

            • LWD@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              It’s wild to see a Mozilla defender throw away their own beliefs and principles in order to defend a corporation wasting $65 million.

              I do not buy “Mozilla must diversify” which slips in the assumption that they are diversifying into the right thing, the “right thing” in this case being AI and other random crap, including a direct competitor to their own Relay service. If you believe this, you need to deal with the cognitive dissonance that comes from this, and explain the basis for why you believe in them while simultaneously believing in the opposite of them.

              And if you don’t know about the Steve Teixeira lawsuit, and you are still being authentic, you’ll have an even harder time reckoning with that. I don’t know how you drilled this deep into a conversation without stumbling across it, but my hope in your honesty springs eternal.

              • CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                You must be one of the few that do not believe they should diversify. Most Mozilla haters criticise the fact they are dependent on Google money and therefore not independent. I did not say it was the right thing. I said I do not believe it is, but iI could be wrong. Not sure if you aware about humility.

                It is not cognitive dissidence to believe positive and negative things about a company or thing. It’s call a balanced decision. It requires nuance, a key component in adult decision making. Usually children struggle with that as something is all great or all bad. Black and white thinking isn’t really fit for the adult world.

                You are surprised that you are supposed to back up your opinions and bring references to a discussion. This is the first time I have heard of this Steve guy. If you think it’s common knowledge, you’ve probably been stuck too deep in the Mozilla haters echo chamber.

                • LWD@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  You must be one of the few that do not believe they should diversify

                  This is an incorrect read of what I said. I said I don’t buy the assumption that Mozilla is diversifying into anything good:

                  If you believe this, you need to deal with the cognitive dissonance that comes from this, and explain the basis for why you believe in them while simultaneously believing in the opposite of them.

                  Unlike you, I provided explicit examples of bad diversification, where are your examples of the good?

                  You are surprised that you are supposed to back up your opinions and bring references to a discussion.

  • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Weird that they called it a “Beta”, like running a chat server you didn’t code is somehow an experiment. Just say you couldn’t be arsed running it anymore.