There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Someonelol ,
@Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

Mozilla’s slowly creeping in the surveillance with adding integrated crap like Pocket and AI driven Fake Spot. I’m really glad Librewolf’s made a privacy focused fork of their browser without all that nonsense.

menixator ,

Related announcement: …mozilla.org/…/privacy-preserving-attribution

TLDR: Mozilla wants your data and it’s opt out. If you’re on FF 128 it’s already on and you will have to turn it off manually. Shame how they have fallen this low. The LEAST they could have done is show a pop up announcement when the user upgraded to 128.

Also: +1 to Librewolf. Mozilla is definitely going to try more scummy crap like this in the future. Definitely the better option over Firefox.

nexussapphire ,

Can’t wait for ladybird to come out! Finally something that speaks our language.

threeduck ,
@threeduck@aussie.zone avatar

Damn, 2026. I hope you CAN wait.

nexussapphire ,

That or the free internet as we know it will be dead by the time it reaches production.

greywolf0x1 ,

I think Servo is a better option, it’s also being written in rust.

timestatic ,

Looks really cool. I hope we don’t have the overreliance on one rendering engine in the future. Once one or the other comes out I’ll definitely try it out.

nexussapphire ,

So long as it survives rusts complexity and lack of portability. I’m always down for more options!

greywolf0x1 ,

rust is complex and non-portable?

i’ve never heard of this, do you mind explaining what you mean better?

nexussapphire ,

You joking? 😆 I don’t want to discourage you from giving rust a try but come on. Have you ever talked to a developer that spent any real time with rust, anyone that got as far as multi threading?

zorrothefox2001 ,
@zorrothefox2001@lemmy.world avatar

Wasn’t Firefox supposed to incorporate Servo in some way or another before Quantum was developed?

greywolf0x1 ,

I think the Quantum release was what integrated some major components of the servo project.

Paradachshund ,

Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but I just read that whole article and it sounds like a good implementation? Companies want to know how effective their ads are, and I like their approach of trying to find a way to provide this without wholesale personal data collection. They even say at the end that they don’t get the data either. It sounds like a reasonable thing to try and standardize.

menixator ,

I’m not commenting on implementation itself but rather on how Mozilla went about with an opt-out approach into the collection program (even if it was for testing) to a community they have cultivated with the promise of privacy.

Collecting my data is a big deal. It doesn’t matter how it is used. I should at least consent to it.

timestatic ,

I feel like this argument is fair enough. I think a pop-up informing the user about it and how to opt out is sufficient.

Zacryon ,
@Zacryon@feddit.org avatar

I’ve read the announcement. Sounds reasonable and sufficiently private to me. So saying “Mozilla wants your data” sounds misleading and like an overreaction to me. Also might help to mitigate the arms race in privacy protection versus tracking for ads and worse stuff.

Mozilla is definitely going to try more scummy crap like this in the future.

How do you know that?

Even if, there will still be alternatives. But right now, Firefox is the best browser with regards to privacy and security. It even passed minmum ratings by the german IT security authority, contrary to other widely used browsers.

SloganLessons ,

Respectefully disagree. Reasonable would’ve been making it opt in, not opt out and justifying it with “would be too difficult to explain”.

Zacryon ,
@Zacryon@feddit.org avatar

I’m with you on the opt-out vs. opt-in part. That’s not a nice move. Regardless of that, Firefox is still the best choice. I hope they will continue to improve.

Mwa ,
@Mwa@thelemmy.club avatar

atleast its opt out

coolusername ,

a lot of sites are unusable with librewolf for some reason

AstralPath , (edited )

A lot of sites? Or more like just a few? Personally, the ratio of working vs broken sites is like 100 to 1 and when a site is broken, its usually one of those shit pile SEO listicle sites or some absolute trash heap of ads. Every time I’ve disabled the protections I’ve regretted it.

A lot of the web is useless trash nowadays and Librewolf has done a good job of filtering that for me.

yuf ,

I’m using AdNauseam instead. So ad networks, what exactly are you collecting?

ivn ,

Click fraud is a big thing, with lots of counter measures, I don’t see how they could go past them as they are saying themselves that they have a very naive approach. To me it’s useless at best, but more probably counterproductive.

yuf ,

I think you’re right about click fraud. Actually, I use AdNauseam primarily to disrupt non-consensual targeted advertising. Even if the impact is small, I’m obfuscating my profile as a form of protest against tracking.

ivn ,

How is this better as a protection against tracking? You are still making requests to trackers, this is so easy to counter, make multiple tracking requests, filter out want changes, keep what’s the same and you have some tracking data.

SapphironZA ,

“And then Mozilla management comes in from the top rope with the chair”

Seriously, for profit companies should not own open source projects.

Chakravanti ,

You can’t stop that. But you can use Librewolf if video download helper stops ignoring Librewolf.

SapphironZA ,

I mostly use waterfox, which is very similar to librefox. I just like the more compacted UI and performance optimization they have done.

Chakravanti ,

That’s awesome. Does Video DownloaderHelper work there?

SapphironZA ,

I believe so. Have not checked recently. All my Firefox extentions work as expected

Ephera ,

That for-profit company is owned by a non-profit. They don’t have shareholders to which they could pay out the profits.

Stern ,
@Stern@lemmy.world avatar

my issue with firefox atm is that both twitter extensions I use have been hobbled/removed by it for what looks to me to be spurious reasons.

github.com/kheina-com/Blue-Blocker/…/294

github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter/discussions/752

inb4 “lol @ using twitter in 2024” I just steal memes from it, and mastodon/bluesky simply aren’t up to speed yet.

Weighing options though I’ll go with Firefox and shitty twitter experience rather then Chrome and the ads everywhere experience. Not really a contest there. Just idle complaints.

RadioFreeArabia ,

I really hope there’s a significant rise in Firefox -and derivatives- usage share. It will be good for everyone, even those stuck on Chromium browsers.

Ghostalmedia ,
@Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world avatar

I’m really hoping Google’s antitrust case doesn’t kill Mozilla. Over 85% of Mozilla’s cash flow is dependent on Google paying for that search box.

Scrollone ,

If Mozilla stopped paying his CEO millions of dollars… and if they actually financed development with people donations…

Ephera ,

We don’t know what they pay their new CEO.

Sarcasmo220 ,

I don’t think google wants to get hit with another antitrust lawsuit for web browsing, so I am sure they will figure out some other deal to funnel money to Firefox

Ghostalmedia ,
@Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world avatar

Good point. Could be like MS and Apple in the late 90’s. When Apple was on death’s door, Gates invested in Apple so MS would have faux competition for regulators.

timestatic ,

Honestly at least they’d be forced to revamp their business model and focus on their users. I’d willingly donate to them monthly if it went to firefox directly and they acted in our interest accordingly

AdrianTheFrog ,
@AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world avatar

I use firefox, I mostly like it, but it still doesn’t support chromium style tab groups (no, that one extension is not similar), and its webgpu implementation also doesn’t work on most websites more than a year after Google made their version available by default

BarbecueCowboy , (edited )

I’ve been using Vivalid, they have ‘Workspaces’ (as its Tab Group analog) which is different but in a way that was a pleasant surprise and kind of reminds me of older systems. Imagine working with one tab group at a time and the rest disappear when you’re not on that workspace.

erev ,
@erev@lemmy.world avatar

is that chromium?

BarbecueCowboy ,

It’s chromium based, but it’s pretty custom at this point. Chrome extensions are still compatible, but the interface/etc will throw you a bit if you’re looking for something that’s a direct swap.

morrowind ,
@morrowind@lemmy.ml avatar

Vivaldi has 3 types of tab groups, workspaces, sessions, and profiles.

Take your pick

archchan ,

Tab groups are in the works but we haven’t heard anything new about it since March.

AdrianTheFrog ,
@AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world avatar

Mozilla could definitely be putting their development time into the areas that the browser is actually behind in

dinozaur ,

Not sure if this is “that one extension”, but I use Simple Tab Groups for Workspaces-like functionality, similar to Edge and Vivaldi. I know, it isn’t tab groups, but I use it similarly.

Ephera ,

I’m guessing, they’re referring to multi-account container tabs. It’s what the Chrome feature took heavy inspiration from, but of course without the privacy protection aspect.

Railison ,

I’ve started using Tree Style Tabs in Firefox and really like it. Maybe vertical tabs aren’t so bad?

Zagorath ,
@Zagorath@aussie.zone avatar

How convenient that this happens just a few days after Firefox implements the features that have been blocking me from switching for the last few years.

Still, I’m curious about other browsers. We know Chrome is killing V2, but what about other Chromium-based browsers? I saw below a comment espousing Brave, but I’d rather use Chrome than Brave because of the gross crypto bs. What about Vivaldi, Opera, and Chredge? Will they keep supporting Manifest V2?

Tar_alcaran ,

just a few days after Firefox implements the features that have been blocking me from switching for the last few years.

Which are those?

Zagorath ,
@Zagorath@aussie.zone avatar

Multi-window support on iPad is the main one. Less important, though it would have bugged me if they didn’t have it, is sustained Incognito tabs—which apparently they had until a couple of months ago, then removed without explanation, then added back in just 1 day ago, also without explanation. Found a thread on their forums with a whole bunch of people perplexed and asking what happened.

Mushroomm ,

Your first point at least is an iPad thing. Nothing is fully featured on the iPad. Not even safari. It’s thanks to that exact fact that chrome is at least mostly fully featured on the iPad. If safari had comparable function, you could bank on them blocking those features from the chrome app too. There’s a deal made somewhere. I wouldn’t be surprised if cash flow from Google is why safari is still the same piece of crap it always has been. “Hey your R&D + return for safari only nets you 1% YOY. We’ll give you 2% YOY if you just don’t even bother.”

They only know raising prices and knee-jerk reactions to competitive moves in their market space. Additional functionality for the user is only granted when it’s being used as a cudgle against their competition. Never for users benefit.

If you’re seeing new functionality on the iPad Firefox app, it’s likely because Firefox figured out a way to implement it without paying apple because they want the user to have that function. Totally different ethos.

ivn ,

Regulations, like the Digital Market Act, are also a big factor.

Zagorath ,
@Zagorath@aussie.zone avatar

If you’re seeing new functionality on the iPad Firefox app, it’s likely because Firefox figured out a way to implement it without paying apple because they want the user to have that function

Nothing at all remotely like that. They just don’t have enough developers to have implemented it sooner. It’s an API that Apple introduced in 2019, that Google implemented within months, Microsoft implemented within a couple of years, and Mozilla finally implemented this July.

ivn ,

There are actually no alternative browser on iOS. Before the European Digital Market Act all iOS browser have to use webkit, so while you could install Firefox, Chrome and others, they were actually using Safari’s rendering engine. I believe that’s where a lot of the limitations come from. Now with the DMA Firefox could use it’s own rendering engine but this hasn’t landed yet. I don’t know if any other browser has switched from webkit yet.

Zagorath ,
@Zagorath@aussie.zone avatar

There are actually no alternative browser on iOS

Sort of. As you say, it’s more accurate to say that they’re forced to use Safari’s rendering, but everything else is up to them, the same as how any other app would be developed. That’s how they get their own features like bookmark syncing etc.

Being able to have multiple windows of the same app is a feature Apple introduced in 2019, and obviously Safari supported it immediately. Google Chrome added support for multiple windows after a few months. I switched to Microsoft Edge once they added support for it about a year, maybe 18 months later, and have just been waiting for Firefox to finally support it so I can switch to that.

Incidentally, 2019 is also the year Firefox finally added support on their desktop browser for a CSS property (column-span) that a site I used to frequent required to work. Though by that time I no longer used that particular site.

SuperIce ,

Mozilla is about to collapse due to the Google antitrust ruling though.

refalo ,

Um, what makes you think that?

Ghostalmedia ,
@Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world avatar

Mozilla makes about $590m a year.

$510m of that is from Google paying for the search engine default spot.

UNY0N ,

Well I for one hope they figure out an alternative income, like a premium subscription? Or perhaps look to get acquired by proton and get some integration going with those services? I’m no expert here, I just think that they have a lot of happy users, and there must be some way to figure this out financially.

anachronist ,

They need to reform as a non-profit with user membership, an elected board, and fundraising like Wikipedia.

hanke ,

This is the real answer

Ephera ,

I’m not aware of any non-profit with staffing the size of Mozilla. The problem is that you need to be able to make money and to set it aside for bad times, so you don’t have to fire employees the moment the donations falter.

The 501©(3) non-profit form of tax-exempt non-profit, which is what the Mozilla Foundation continues to be, is not allowed to do so. That’s why they opened up the for-profit Mozilla Corporation subsidiary that does most of the Firefox development.

On the plus side, the only shareholder of the Mozilla Corporation is the Mozilla Foundation, which therefore essentially cannot accept any of the profit the MoCo might make.

raspberriesareyummy ,

That’s a ridiulously low amount of money given the amount of users. I’d happily pay 10-20 bucks a year to keep mozilla alive. Not that I like it much, but more so than the big alternatives

Ghostalmedia ,
@Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world avatar

Yeah, Apple seems to be able to fetch a little more than a billion per percent of the browser market (18% at 20B), but Mozilla is only able to score 0.5B for 2-3% of the market. Mozilla is getting a quarter of Apple’s rate.

That said, Apple has a lot more leverage than Google, and they can strong arm a better deal. I also wouldn’t be surprised if Safari users are just a more valuable marketing cohort. Firefox’s user base is going to have a lot more people who opt out of and or block targeted marketing.

SuperIce ,

The Google antitrust decision will result in Mozilla losing 90% of their revenue since Google won’t be allowed to pay them to use their search engine anymore.

Scrollone ,

The antitrust case is about Google and Apple, not Mozilla. It doesn’t mean the antitrust case will have any impact on Mozilla, because it’s not a major player, unlike Apple.

lolcatnip ,

I don’t think you realize where and why Mozilla gets its funding.

anachronist ,

Mozilla and its murder/suicide pact with Google falling apart may be the best thing that could possibly happen to Firefox.

ssm ,
@ssm@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

https://lemmy.sdf.org/pictrs/image/86cd0dac-085c-4610-bc51-7bcec45c7499.png

darkevilmac ,
@darkevilmac@lemmy.zip avatar

Source: I made it up

ssm , (edited )
@ssm@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

I guess Anonym, PPA, Cliqz, pocket, the default telemetry that is non-trivial to disable, and whatever this latest nonsense is are all just hallucinations.

Matriks404 ,

That doesn’t seem to be a source for OP’s message.

VarosBounska ,

I do not study in detail if this combination is necessary, but:

  • Firefox (of course)
  • Ghostery
  • Ublock Origin
  • Privacy Badger
  • Decentraleyes
  • Disconnect
ivn ,

All of them except uBlock Origin are in Arkenfox “Do not bother” extension list: github.com/arkenfox/user.js/wiki/4.1-Extensions#-…

Anafabula ,
@Anafabula@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

Ghostery, Privacy Badger and Disconnect do nothing worthwhile that uBlock Origin doesn’t already do.

Zwiebel ,

privacyguides.org seems quite solid for recommendations

Truck_kun ,

For others, I set up uBlock at minimum.

For myself uBlock + uMatrix.

If on a computer need more security uBlock + uMatrix + NoScript.

uBlock and uMatrix can block scripts, but I find NoScript’s fine grain control to be user friendly. Makes it a pain to browse the web though, until you setup each of your normal sites.

Paradachshund ,

Has it actually been confirmed when it’s coming? I feel like this has been threatened for years now.

ivn ,

It started in june, for now it’s just showing a warning saying that the extension will soon no longer be supported. They’ll be disabled gradually until the beginning of 2025.

developer.chrome.com/…/mv2-deprecation-timeline

Paradachshund ,

Ah I see. Boiling the frog as it were.

ivn ,

Well, as much as I hate Google I don’t think that’s the intention of this particular point, rolling out big changes gradually is standard.

ArbitraryValue ,

We need another meme like this about Firefox but with the first panel saying “Antitrust judgement against Google” and the second panel blank, without anyone coming to the rescue.

The large majority of Mozilla’s revenue comes from the money that Google pays to be the default search engine in Firefox.

breakingcups ,

Wonder if the recent antitrust ruling about Google paying for being the default search engine will affect Mozilla’s funding.

NiPfi ,

And in the meantime Mozilla keeps making worse decisions, too

gdog05 ,

Enshitification of all the things.

HotsauceHurricane ,

Someone who gives a damn needs to be in charge of mozilla but i dont see that happening.

thesporkeffect ,

As long as they are entirely supported by Google, they aren’t going to try too hard to outcompete them.

Ephera ,

In order to get away from that, they need to find alternative ways of making money, like showing ads, which loops us back around to the guy above saying they’re making bad decisions.

thesporkeffect ,

Your point is fair, but their real problem is they bloated up to absorb their insane budget and they are going to have to strip down to a reasonable size for a browser company before trying to establish a non-google revenue stream.

Ephera ,

How the hell would you know this? There’s a reason no grassroots project is able to compete with Chrome, Firefox or Safari, and it’s not for a lack of trying.

And if you’re going to tell me they should stop doing Pocket etc., then please refer to my comment above.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •