And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.

  • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    229
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Obligatory use Firefox

    No way. Why should I feel obligated to use something I feel has inferior UX and UI than the browser I’m using now? For Mozilla’s CEO to rais her wage (again): https://calpaterson.com/mozilla.html ?

    You people are really delusional if you really think that Mozilla are the only good guys (or good guys at all, for that matters).

    Inb4, unimaginative people downvoting just because they can’t stand different opinions.

    • Teodomo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      120
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What’s your alternative?

      EDIT: Oh I just found in the profile. It’s Brave. I used it for half a year before I got tired of the crypto ads sneaking into my home page’s links no matter how many times I deleted them and of some other stuff. I prefer Firefox’s UI. Also I don’t expect any browser to be 100% ethical but Brave is below Firefox in that list for me

      • Restaldt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you truly cared about the state of the internet youd only browse websites with wget and text editors

        Or something

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        77
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nice detective skills. I have the opposite view about Brave/Mozilla. But fine, we can agree to disagree and still be (virtual) friends.

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        122
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t matter and it’s irrelevant here. I just despise Mozilla and their false morality. Use whatever you want.

        • antisoma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          64
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not irrelevant since you stated Firefox is less good than what you are using now. Of course people are interested in a feasible alternative. So, since you introduced it, what are you using instead?

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            67
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I said that I feel it’s less good. I’m not going to tell people what they should use and I surely won’t tell them to use the same browser I use. People should simply use whatever they prefer/suits them best.

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            55
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I didn’t know I was so evil that I’m doing the world a worse place just because I prefer a different browser. And I’m ideologically far form alt-right, btw.

            OTOH, talking about corporate greed:

            • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              50
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              that is a funny graph. Even assuming the data is true, it deliberately missrepresents market share as usage. Which pretty much neglects the fact hat maybe a person or two and a device with a browser or two have entered the market since then.

              Also it does not have any information on source of the data, methodology, definition of the terms etc. So it is pretty much worthless as an argument.

              • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                40
                ·
                1 year ago

                that is a funny graph. Even assuming the data is true, it deliberately missrepresents market share as usage. Which pretty much neglects the fact hat maybe a person or two and a device with a browser or two have entered the market since then.

                Fine, so on the same basis we can also reject the “chromium dominance” argument, which is the main selling point of Mozilla.

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            1 year ago

            “inhuman immorality” LOL

            Listen, man… I’m all for LBGT+ people rights, but let’s be real donating few thousands on a campaign is far from “inhuman immorality”.

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      1 year ago

      I downvoted you because you made a terrible case for yourself. Learn to make a salient point, or learn to love being “edgy”. the choice is up to you, but the internet already has plenty of the latter, why not become the former?

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Nice to know that you downvoted me for no actual reason, as I didn’t make any “case”. Have a candy.

      • lohrun@fediverse.boo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s just how it goes now it seems, we just have to go with the lesser of the evils for everything. Sure there is FOSS for some stuff but even then FOSS has its fair share of issues

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Moreover, Firefox’s UI is incomparably superior to that of Chrome.

        No. It’s crap. Utter crap.

        without considering the infinite userchrome.css customisations.

        “Unsupported” and surely an incentive for less tech-savvy people to look elewhere. But whatever. I’ won’t bother to reply to anything else, as you’re statistically one of these persons that spend their life watching crappy youtube videos and buying shit on Amazon.

    • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel obligated to raise awareness about these topics. I won’t prevent anyone from choosing Chrome, but at the very least it’s important for people to know what their choice can entail, and base their decision on that.

      • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We also need to raise awareness about what giving google hegemony over defining what the web will be means.

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        I won’t prevent anyone from using FF, either. I just think that the “obligatory use Firefox” is quite arrogant, to say the least. And, to be honest, I’m quite happy it’s not going to happen until FF is managed by Mozilla and their poor choices.

        • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          The obligatory use Firefox has been a running gag in the FOSS community for ages now. Nothing arrogant about it, though it does come across as a bit blunt and brazen, to be fair.

          It’s just that letting a single entity be the ultimate authority on how the internet (or anything, for that matter) should look like is objectively a bad idea.

          Especially when that entity is widely known for being insidiously self serving, malicious and manipulative.

          That being said, enough people have explained this already, so I’m gonna leave it there.

          Have a nice day

    • mrmanager@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There is a huge difference between mozilla and google. That’s quite obvious to most. The ceo raising his salary is a problem for you, and you prefer Google, where they have enormous salaries and incomes? It’s one of the richest companies in the world.

      Firefox doesn’t have inferior UX at all. It has more functions and features than chrome. It also has very good default privacy and the plugin system is amazing.

      And it just became faster than chrome as well.

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The ceo raising his salary is a problem for you

        It’s not for me (anymore). It should be for you. She was raising her salary while firing devs… But whatever. Mozillians are seldom rational.

    • VoxAdActa@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dude, look, I’m sorry Firefox killed your dog (or whatever). But please stop spamming your irrational hate-boner for Mozilla all over the thread.

    • FoxBJK@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re not saying you should feel obligated to use Firefox. It’s a tongue-in-cheek joke about how everything FLOSS, Privacy or GDPR related always includes a comment thread about using Firefox. I use Brave too but you gotta read the room. Lemmy users in general are going to be much more pro-Firefox than anything else.

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        I understand. I just feel it’s quite arrogant ans annoying to be (indirectly) schooled by strangers on the internet who think they know better.

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            Indeed, I’d love Seamonkey to be a viable alternative, for instance.

        • YellowtoOrange@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          You criticize but don’t even have the balls to name your browser? To back up your claims?

          That is pathetic.

          • Zetaphor@zemmy.cc
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s Brave, as evidenced in their history. The browser that peddles crypto ads, has a transphobe CEO, and has been accused of selling copyrighted data

            • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              1 year ago

              I surely deserve death for using a browser you don’t like. Jeez, people can be so obtuse sometimes…

              • Zetaphor@zemmy.cc
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 year ago

                I surely deserve death for using a browser you don’t like.

                I’m not sure how you managed to come to that conclusion. You claimed Firefox is a poor choice, I’m demonstrating why I believe your alternative choice is worse. Nevermind the fact that use of Chromium is effectively an acceptance of Google’s monopoly over the web standards, which is the point we’re all arguing here. If you can’t handle criticism you should reconsider making such hyperbolic remarks.

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Someone just insulted me and called me “alt-right” person or “crypto bro” (I’m neither of both). So, do you really think that I’m the pathetic one?

            And… Which “claims”, by the way? I just said that I’m annoyed by people telling me “I should” do something and that I’ll decide by myself. Full stop. Coherently, I’m not giving you alternatives nor have I to disclose anything.

            Sometimes it looks like one has to apologize for using Brave or Vivaldi or any other shit that didn’t come out from Mozilla’s ass. Keep using FF if this makes you happy. It made me happy for 20 years, but then I got fed up by 1) Mozilla, 2) Mozilla’s community 3) The browser itself.

            Don’t worry. One day Mozillians will receive a reality bath and realise the farce they have supported.

            • Zetaphor@zemmy.cc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              People should be attacking your idea, not their perception of you based on your choice in browser.

              My objection with Brave, Vivaldi, and other other browser that is just Chrome with a different skin of paint is they are all signalling an acceptance of Google’s monopoly over the web standards ecosystem.

              Mozilla is a shit organization run by a shit CEO, but they’re the only alternative we have to the megalith that is the advertising company known as Google. It really shouldn’t be a hard argument to understand that putting an advertising company at the head of the web standards process is a really bad idea if you care about anything other than Google’s revenue streams, ie a free and open web.

              Chromium only exists as a way for Google to keep antitrust regulators from coming after them like they did to Microsoft when IE had a monopoly. It’s source-available, not open source, they don’t accept commits from non-Googlers. The moment they feel safe closing down the Chromium repos without having to loose too much money in fines or blowback, they absolutely will.

              We’re literally watching this happen right now with Android, another formally open source project from Google that is slowly having all of its open source components clawed back so that they can maintain their control over the ecosystem and protect the revenue stream that is their data collection and app store.

              When Google inevitably decides to pull the plug on Chromium the collective of forked browser developers is not going to be able to keep up with the massive engineering effort required to keep a modern browser going. Especially when a corporation like Google can and will push forward complex and difficult to implement standards expressly for the purpose of making those forks obsolete. They have the manpower, capital, and control over massive web properties to effectively push out anyone they don’t want.

              All it takes is them making a change to Youtube that hinders alternative browsers and that will be the death of that open source ecosystem. They’ve literally pulled this exact move before with Youtube by hindering Firefox’s performance by pushing through the implementation of shadow DOM.

              All of this has happened before and all of this will happen again. Trusting an advertising company with control of the open web is the nerd equivalent of leopards ate my face