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.

uBlock Origin developer recommends switching to Firefox as Chrome flags the extension

~~www.neowin.net/news/…/~~

EDIT: Apologies. Updated with a link to what gorhill REALLY said:

Manifest v2 uBO will not be automatically replaced by Manifest v3 uBOL[ight]. uBOL is too different from uBO for it to silently replace uBO – you will have to explicitly make a choice as to which extension should replace uBO according to your own prerogatives.

Ultimately whether uBOL is an acceptable alternative to uBO is up to you, it’s not a choice that will be made for you.

**Will development of uBO continue?**Yes, there are other browsers which are not deprecating Manifest v2, e.g. Firefox.

NaoPb ,

I agree with them. Better switch to Firefox.

TheFrirish ,

I don’t want to let go of my poor Vivaldi it’s a blast of a browser

mke , (edited )

Oh, how I get you! I managed to switch to Firefox after a while, but it took some adapting, and still I miss some of Vivaldi’s features. That sidebar is simply fantastic.

ShortFuse ,

I’ve been using uBOLite for about a year and I’m pretty happy with it. You don’t have to give the extension access to the content on the page and all the filtering on the browser engine, not over JavaScript.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

I hadn’t heard of this.

The FAQ says it’s not a 1 for 1 replacement. There’s a lot of features which can’t be ported.

It’s probably better than nothing for most people, but not as good as uBO was.

Still, I wonder why it’s not mentioned more often.

Katana314 ,

Not quite on topic, but: This past week developers at my company have been slammed by the Chrome DevTools debugger freezing when you hit a breakpoint. There’s been no tracked bug and no timeline from Chrome on a fix. It’s been a little bit of a lesson in having just one browser engine.

numberfour002 ,

Understatement, I know, but I find this so annoying, and it certainly feels malicious.

I was just commenting the other day how ridiculous it is that google search results literally serve up malware to people via paid ads. My neighbor was running into issues where her computer kept getting “infected” and a full screen scam would take control, blaring out a loud message that her computer was infected with a virus, that it was infecting microsoft’s servers, and she had to call them now to fix it.

After investigating, I found out that these types of scams are stored as blobs on Microsoft’s cloud service, but the links are spread via ads in google search. When I tried searching for the exact search terms my neighbor was using on my own devices and my own network, I found out that google was serving me the exact same ads, aka sponsored links. They look like legitimate results for things that people search for, like showing what appears to be a link to Amazon when searching for a product, even the links will say “www.amazon.com”.

Obviously I told my neighbor not to use Chrome and suggested some browser alternatives. I installed uBlock on all the browsers (including chrome) just to be safe. Then I showed her how to tell when things are ads, even when they are deceiving, and to never click on ads or sponsored links under any circumstances.

But it’s definitely infuriating that they are serving up malware in their ads, don’t respond to reports in a timely manner, are getting people caught in scams that they allow to advertise on their network but then somehow object to people managing those risks by blocking ads from untrustworthy sources, like google.

knight ,

I just did a cleanup on someone’s computer that got this. They actually called the number and got scammed out of their whole life savings. The usual Indian scammers.

Mars2k21 ,
@Mars2k21@sh.itjust.works avatar

This has been a long time in the making…hopefully Firefox will see a market share increase. Google is doing this right as they get slapped by an antitrust ruling ironically lol. If you haven’t already just go ahead and switch, if you like Lemmy you’ll probably like Firefox as well.

Side note: I try not to be negative here, but this would be a great time for Mozilla to get their act together as an organization. Love Firefox and the idea, but Mozilla has been pissing off the FOSS space for a while now with their decisions. If they’ve improved in recent years, disregard this.

PM_Your_Nudes_Please ,

The tricky part is that Google isn’t wrong about Manifest v3 increasing security for some people. Just allowing any extension to access the full URLs from a webpage is honestly pretty sketchy for most things that aren’t adblockers. Think about Beth in accounting who has 27 bloatware toolbar extensions installed on her home PC, which are happily collecting her full browser history and sending it off to gods know where. Manifest v3 is targeted at increasing security for those users, by making it more difficult for extensions to track you.

The issue is that it also makes ad blocking virtually impossible, because the blocker is forced to just trust that the browser is being truthful about what is and isn’t on the page. And when the browser (developed by one of the largest advertisers in the world) has a vested financial interest in displaying ads, there’s very little trust that the browser will actually be honest.

The issue is that there’s not some sort of “yes, I really want this extension to have full access” legacy workaround built in. Yes, it would inevitably be abused by those scummy extensions, which would just nag idiot users to allow them full access. And the idiot users, being idiots, would just do it without understanding the risks. Even if Chrome threw up all kinds of big red “hey make sure this extension actually needs full access and isn’t just tracking your shit” warning flags, there are still plenty of users who would happily give bloatware full access without reading any of the warnings. But it would also allow ad blockers to continue to function.

x00z ,
@x00z@lemmy.world avatar

If it was about security then they should simply block Manifest v2 extensions from their store or at least start doing some actual verification of the extensions they host. Taking away freedom claiming it to be for security is almost always a lie.

helpImTrappedOnline ,

Verify! But what will all the “Cändy Crunch 7 Browser Edition with 12 Free Play Levels” players do?

Voroxpete ,

The single biggest security improvement you could make for Beth in accounting would be to install UBO. Where do you think she gets all those shitty toolbar extensions? That’s right, from ads.

This is targeted at destroying adblockers because Google is, first and foremost, an ad serving company. That’s their business model. It incidentally improves security for certain users in certain edge cases, because they need some kind of figleaf of legitimacy.

helpImTrappedOnline ,

Ads and crappy installers, all though that seems less common than it used to be. I can’t say if that’s a general trend or tunnel vision due to me not installing crapware.

send_cortical_nodes ,

Can you share some examples of things that pisses off the FOSS space? Mostly just curious to understand more

irreticent ,
@irreticent@lemmy.world avatar

Here’s the most recent example:

The browser that promises “no shady privacy notices or advertiser backdoors” on its storefront has suddenly added an experimental feature to beam user interactions to advertisers and enables it by default. Many are not happy.

TheGrandNagus , (edited )

It should be noted that the advertisers get zero personal information, neither does Mozilla, and it has been designed in a way so that the data is impossible to fingerprint in a way that can tie it back to any individual person, machine, or specific location.

It’s a way for advertisers (and like it or not, a decent amount of the content we want has to be paid for somehow) to see how effective their ads are without anybody’s privacy being encroached on.

Should it have been turned on without informing the user? Fuck no. But there’s a lot of misinformation going around about this.

Personally I’ll still be using uBO, because I despise any ads at all, but if we are to have ads, the system Mozilla has built is just about the most ethical and privacy-respecting way to do it.

smayonak ,

Even if Mozilla takes precautions to avoid de-anonymizing our data, any private data sold to data brokers becomes a part of the puzzle for learning our identities

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_re-identification

Even knowing something a trivial as two movie ratings led to a 68% success rate in learning an identity.

TheGrandNagus , (edited )

I suggest you actually look into how their system works. This kind of strategy is not possible with Mozilla’s system.

In fact, your very link points to ‘Differential Privacy’ as a very effective foil to re-identification, and that’s basically how the Mozilla system operates.

This is not a matter of Mozilla having a load of data about your account or IP, then Mozilla scrubbing that information then sending the database to advertisers.

smayonak ,

I appreciate your informed response but no system other than advertising-abstinence is fool proof.

Im saying this as a supporter. My browser of choice is firefox and I send them money regularly. And I understand their need to generate more revenue. But there has never been a company who has sold customer data discretely. My understanding is that every piece of data that’s sold can be de anonymized when combined with other data sets. And the data is horsetraded until it gets into some very marginal actors’ hands.

Mozilla’s need for money is largely driven by massive mismanagement. It should have been fully funded in perpetuity through establishing a foundation that operates off interest payments but they decided to try and build a headquarters in Mountainview. They also operate offices in some of the most expensive cities in the world. They have made expensive software aquisitions. These are not necessary and have only whetted mozilla’s thirst for other revenue sources. It’s guaranteed that they will look for more customer data to sell because that’s the path of least resistance.

I wish them luck but I also wish they’d not chase advertising money.

claudiop ,

As for the “no system is foolproof”, you’re thinking of implementations, not algorithms. An algorithm can indeed be something-proof. Most “known” algorithms are built on top of very strong mathematical foundations stating what is possible, what is not and what is a maybe.

As for the ads thing, Mozilla is not making a dime off this. It is not monetizable. They’re basically expecting that by giving advertisers a fairly “benign” way to do their shenanigans they will stop doing things the way they currently do (with per-individual tracking).

The absolutists might say that there’s no such thing as benign ads, however truth is that the market forces behind ads are big enough that you’d get website-integrity-bullshit rather ad-free web. Having tracking less ads is better than having a “this website only works in chrome” or “only without extensions” internet.

Is there any other possibility? Maybe. Is is reasonable to think that the moment tracking starts getting blocked em masse, we risk a web-integrity-bullshit +wherever-said-tracking-can-exist-only internet? I think so.

smayonak ,

I think you’re right and that I’ve horribly misunderstood how this data is collected and used. According to their yearly report, mozilla’s advertising revenue is explicitly not drawn from user data and is only related to tiles and default search engine sponsorships. The fact that they are not selling this information is heartening and it inspires confidence that they have not flipped on the ad money spigot.

ILikeBoobies ,

That’s a good thing

Getting trackers out of cookies is something users want

ekZepp ,
@ekZepp@lemmy.world avatar

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/376e6956-36f6-454d-9aac-62a656f140e8.png

Muffi ,

What are the main differences, for someone considering going from Firefox to Librewolf?

itslilith ,
@itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Librewolf is to Firefox what Chromium is to Chrome, essentially. Removed many bloated Mozilla anti-features, has sensible (but not paranoid) privacy and security defaults and ships with uBlock origin pre-installed. You can archive all of that with Firefox, but Librewolf makes things easy for you.

JaddedFauceet ,

the first comparison is not technically correct, in the sense:

  • Chrome is built on top of Chromium
  • LibreWolf is built on top of Firefox

LibreWolf implements additional privacy features and settings on top of Firefox. Chromium is the base browser that everyone else built on top of. It does not implement additional privacy features.

perhaps a better comparison would be: LibreWolf is to Firefox what Ungoogled Chromium is to Chromium

owiseedoubleyou ,
@owiseedoubleyou@lemmy.ml avatar

Librewolf is hardened out of the box whereas with Firefox, you have to harden it yourslf

br3ad ,

You should also consider arkenfox user.js

Zink ,

I’ve been eyeing up librewolf, having made the switch to Firefox on all machines a while back.

If I’m using DDG for search, uBlock Origin, bitwarden, strict tracking protection, disabled data collection and ad measurements, and then have https-only in all windows and max protection dns over https, will I see any practical difference?

In this case I do prefer functionality over 100% perfect privacy and anti-advertising. I’m fortunate to be able to run Linux on my work machine (I use mint, btw) and so I use the browser versions of M365 including Teams video conferencing.

ulkesh ,
@ulkesh@lemmy.world avatar

Already switched as soon as I learned of Google’s plans. They can go screw themselves for doing this. Firefox, the land of the free and open source!

chiliedogg ,

On the same day Google was found to be in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act…

ipkpjersi ,

Too bad nothing will come from that.

Crikeste ,

I’m going to call foul play on Judge Mehta’s ruling. They are a direct competitor.

pyrflie ,

How the hell is a Judge a competitor with Google for Search?

Raxiel ,

Because their maiden name is Judge Fasbuk?

pyrflie , (edited )

deleted_by_author

    •
    grozzle ,

    whoosh

    Mehta sounds like Meta, Fasbuk sounds like Facebook. it was a joke.

    pyrflie ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    grozzle ,

    I was trying to help you see how you misunderstood, but sure. Beep boop.

    boonhet ,

    They were explaining on how the joke flew over your head. If there’s reason to think anyone in this exchange is a bot, it’d be you, because you can’t really understand jokes even when they’re explained to you. Though nowadays, even bots understand jokes, ChatGPT can explain them fairly well.

    Raxiel ,

    One of Googles biggest competitor’s is the company “Meta” which is phonetically similar to the judges name. The previous commentator made a joke where they appeared to confuse the corporation for the person. A situation that would be absurd if true, and from there the humour arose.
    When a respondent (you) appeared to miss the subtext in the comment, and took it at face value, I made a post where I gave the impression I had made the same mistake , and suggested that the judge had previously had a name phonetically similar to “Facebook” which was the name previously used by the corporation now called “Meta”.

    Such a situation would require a coincidence even more implausible and absurd than the first, and was intended to demonstrate that neither comment should be taken seriously.

    Your comment indicates you either failed to identify the absurdity, possibly due to confirmation bias following your previous response. Or you are attempting to “up the ante” by erroneously taking such absurdity seriously for further humourous effect. Your follow up comments elsewhere suggest the former.

    Regardless, the “joke” has now been thoroughly killed by way of explanation. You can choose to accept the explanation or choose to remain in error.

    yamanii ,
    @yamanii@lemmy.world avatar

    This is the biggest whoosh I’ve seen on lemmy.

    uis ,

    What happened?

    chiliedogg ,

    They lost what may end up being the biggest antitrust case in decades. And it’s not weak sauce like the ruling that may get overturned regarding the Play Store monopoly (which is kinda weak since Android manufacturers can and do include other app stores on their phones).

    It had to do with their anti-competitive behavior regarding Online Search. Specifically stuff like paying Apple and other manufacturers to make Google the default or even exclusive search engine, then using that not only to capture the market, but to charge more for ads than the competition they sabotage.

    As a bonus, it’ll probably hurt reddit too, since it almost certainly makes their recent deal with Google illegal.

    It’ll be appealed, but it’s a pretty big ruling. Between the US Courts, EU legislature, and what looks poised to be a flop for Gemini/Bard, Google is on its way to having a real shit year.

    Big_Boss_77 ,

    I find I can bear their discomfort with extreme fortitude.

    Phoenicianpirate ,

    I only use chrome when checking my Gmail account. Brave is my go-to.

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Guess you get to find out if this will be effecting all of chromium or just chrome…

    Traister101 ,

    Brave is forked from Chromium so hypothetically they could maintain V2 but they’d need their own store as they currently rely on Googles

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Guess we will see if Brave is all talk or not in the coming years.

    0oWow ,

    Brave has added a feature to explicitly enable MV2 apps and install uBo directly from Brave settings. You can also install uMatrix and Adguard MV2 versions also.

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Or you could just Avoid chromium browsers and help the browser landscape from becoming a sea of chrome.

    0oWow ,

    And jump to the clone? Mozilla isn’t better (consider their recent Ad Privacy clone), they just have less market share.

    That said, I use Firefox and Brave. Whatever I feel like at the time.

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    The clone? Are you implying that mozilla (founded 1998) is a clone of chrome (first launched 2008)?

    Just use anything but chome or chromium if you can. Just don’t feed the beast now known as alphabet.

    megopie ,

    There are plenty of browsers built on Gecko that aren’t fire fox. So if you don’t trust Mozilla to build your browser, and don’t want your ad blocker bricked by Google, you have options.

    Butterpaderp ,

    I just got firefox yesterday, cause I noticed youtube started baking unskippable ads into their site.

    Phoenicianpirate ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Avoid chromium browsers

    grubbyweasel ,

    I don’t like or use brave for multiple reasons but why is the fact that it’s built on chromium a problem?

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Because every browser is becoming 3 chromes in a trench coat.

    Long term this will be an issue.

    Anti_Iridium ,

    LONG LIVE GECKO

    aStonedSanta ,

    They are doing what Apple has done to browsers on iPhones. It’s all safari all the way down… lol

    boonhet ,

    Ironically, Apple forcing Safari on iPhones is the single greatest thing standing between Chromium and total market domination.

    Not that it’s a good thing for Apple users, but it’s the one remaining reason not to slap a “Not on Chromium? Don’t bother visiting” sign on every website. Us Firefox users don’t matter, statistically speaking

    aStonedSanta ,

    Fuck. I hadn’t even thought of that perspective. You are totally right.

    Burghler ,

    Link is borked, add another ) at the end

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Works fine for me and has the ), what are you using to look at it?

    en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_(web_browser)…)

    Burghler ,

    This link works for me but the previous has the same broken link. I’m using the Sync android client. ¯⁠\⁠(⁠°⁠_⁠o⁠)⁠/⁠¯

    The 1st opens a link to the wiki page: Chromium (web browser

    Missing the ending ) for me

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Odd so it does not like the link getting renamed then.

    rozodru , (edited )
    @rozodru@lemmy.ca avatar

    yup I recently switched from Vivaldi to librewolf which is a shame cause I really liked vivaldi and it’s customization and embedded email but since it’s chromium I knew it was just a matter of time before I had to switch.

    edit: annnnnnd nevermind I just found Floorp so I’m happy again.

    icedterminal ,

    Vivaldi does have it’s own built in adblocker. You can add sources. It’s not as robust at uBO, but than nothing

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Tell us more of the Floorp. (as long as its not based on chrome)

    rozodru ,
    @rozodru@lemmy.ca avatar

    it’s firefox based. Japanese browser that has the same customization as vivaldi (which is why I really liked vivaldi) so I can have my address bar and navigation bar at the bottom, my tabs up top, and all my other stuff on the side of the window.

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Any issues with not being set up in Japanese?

    rozodru ,
    @rozodru@lemmy.ca avatar

    nope, runs great I really dig it. set it as my default.

    M0oP0o ,
    @M0oP0o@mander.xyz avatar

    Neat, thanks for letting us know. Will have to try it.

    priapus ,

    Floorp is an excellent browser. I mainly use it for the first class vertical tab support, but it’s ability to pin websites to open in a sidebar is great. I use it for stuff like Proton mail and drive.

    I will say in case anyone here saw it in the past, it had a bit of drama around the author making part of it closed source, but that was fortunately resolved before it was ever released with any proprietary code.

    Jakeroxs ,

    In case it matters vivaldi.com/…/manifest-v3-update-vivaldi-is-futur…

    Summzashi ,

    It should be bannable to recommend that trojan here

    rozodru ,
    @rozodru@lemmy.ca avatar

    you will soon though.

    Darkshadow5 ,
    @Darkshadow5@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    i use brave on my phone since its harder to adblock on phones for me

    Anti_Iridium ,

    Firefox mobile has ublock origin

    Darkshadow5 ,
    @Darkshadow5@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    ooh ty i’ll try it :)

    bluewing ,

    I switched my phone browser the Firefox Mobile and have installed ublock and I am quite satisfied so far.

    douglasg14b , (edited )
    @douglasg14b@lemmy.world avatar

    Ah yes, the browser that monetizers based on activity tracking. The one based on chromium, handing Google further control over web standards. The browser with a a mysterious nearly unlimited budget for advertising before they even had a handful of users. That browser.

    irotsoma ,
    @irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

    I’ve been using LibreWolf on Desktop and Mull on Android. Basically more securely configured versions of Firefox with the proprietary telemetry and some other stuff removed. Takes some tweaking to get certain websites to work that need more access than they should or use Certificate Authorities that don’t have working OSCP servers.

    can , (edited )

    If any site doesn’t work you can try this official addon Chrome Mask. If it works with it on you can report it Mozilla.

    Edit: a bit of context:

    https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/797473c8-9717-4bc0-98ec-ea2632a92e2c.jpeg

    bluewing ,

    I"m going to try that extension to see if it helps with a couple of websites. So thanks for the recommendation!

    can ,

    If it does help be sure to report it to Mozilla! Otherwise the site admins will just see another Chrome user and have little. Incentive to focus on FF.

    saplyng ,

    Thanks for sharing the extension! I just got some passkeys and they just weren’t working on several websites for Firefox (looking at you Azure) but that solved the issue immediately!

    can ,

    Be sure to report a bug to Mozilla regarding those pages!

    _haha_oh_wow_ ,
    @_haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works avatar

    I recommend switching to another browser like Firefox or Librewolf.

    ipkpjersi , (edited )

    I love Librewolf currently but I worry it’s going to stray too much from what it originally was like Waterfox and others ended up doing, and then end up randomly breaking compatibility with certain plugins or introducing other issues.

    Right now, Librewolf is the best way to experience Firefox. Will that still be the case in 5, 10, 15 years? That remains to be seen. I hope it’s still the best way to experience Firefox years from now. Having to change browsers every so often does suck tbh.

    fine_sandy_bottom ,

    Meh.

    Librewolf already breaks loads of websites with it’s fingerprinting resistance - just get used to turning it off.

    In any case, you already need a chromium fork handy for all the sites that just plain don’t support firefox any more. I’ve run in to weird issues in firefox that don’t arise in chromium several times in the last month. This is going to get much worse.

    As for changing browsers. I don’t care very much. I don’t use many browser features like bookmarks or passwords.

    ipkpjersi ,

    Which websites did you run into issues with Firefox? I haven’t had any issues with any websites. I do think you’re right that it’s probably going to get worse over time, but maybe not if more people make the switch to Firefox.

    fine_sandy_bottom , (edited )

    booking.com is the worst I’ve encountered. There’s a captcha type anti-bot thing that I can’t pass with firefox. I think it uses canvas.

    edit: another I use all the time is called echo360. It’s the platform my university uses to host lecture videos. The player just plain doesn’t work in firefox - blank screen.

    xavier666 ,

    Those are jumping to Librewolf from Firefox, keep the following things in mind

    • It’s a privacy first, usability second browser
    • It’s not a browser for your grandparents. You have you take some steps to give it the same functionality as Firefox
    • Good news is it removes a lot of Mozilla cruft
    • Browser fingerprinting, which allows websites to recognize an individual user, is disabled on this browser. This feature greatly enhances privacy.
    • But it means it will ‘slightly’ break some websites. Nothing very serious but certain QoL features will be missing at first. Eg. When downloading a software, it can’t determine which OS you are using.
    • You can enable browser fingerprinting and get those QoL features back.

    Hope you have a good experience on Librewolf. I’ve been using it for the past 1 year and it’s fine.

    exanime ,

    Using firedragon for desktop (Linux) and between iceraven and mull for mobile

    AShadyRaven ,

    hello, i have chosen to value your opinion above my own based on very shaky reasoning i will not be sharing

    I abandoned chrome for being too RAM-hungry when im playing games w the browser open

    i abandoned Internet Explorer for being too slow

    and i abandoned firefox for being too bloated and sluggish, but that was like 2010 and things change

    im currently using Opera but why do you choose firefox over its contemporaries?

    megopie ,

    Because it’s not based on chromium(blink web engine), there are two other well supported web engines which browsers can be based on, WebKit (Apple), and Gecko (Mozilla).

    At the end of the day, if it’s built on Blink, it’s liable to have Google break things they don’t like on the back end. Including ad blockers.

    Opera used to be built on it’s own web engine (presto) but since 2013 it’s been built on Blink.

    AShadyRaven ,

    that was a great summary, thank you

    trying to research such a broad topic was overwhelming

    _haha_oh_wow_ ,
    @_haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works avatar

    Firefox is open source and Opera is still based on Chromium (the engine for Chrome, same as Edge and a number of other browsers).

    For practical use, Firefox seems plenty fast on my devices including mobile.

    anticurrent ,

    The best action ublock origions devs can take is drop support for chromium based browsers and retract ublock lite from the chrome webstore.

    I was hopefull for something more than just a wiki page on github. adding a banner to chrome’s add-on menu is way more powerful and far more reaching than what they did

    AShadyRaven ,

    i crave decisiveness like that. it would make me so happy if that sort of behavior became the norm.

    too many corpos getting away with murder because they are more convenient than their competitors or because switching is too hard

    FeelThePower ,

    ive gotten almost my entire friend group using either the same fork as me or the original firefox, they all used chrome before. all because google was dumb enough to overstep some peoples boundaries.

    TriflingToad ,

    if you don’t mind, which fork are you using? I got my sister to switch to firefox too.

    sparkle ,

    not the original commenter but FLOORP, BABYYYY!!! let’s go let’s get this floorp action come on floorp is the best reign supreme for a thousand years floorp woooooo

    ripcord , (edited )
    @ripcord@lemmy.world avatar

    You’ve watched a lot of Rick and Morty haven’t you

    sparkle ,

    n… nuh uh

    FeelThePower ,

    I use waterfox. They are independent again since last year and their big thing besides privacy is that they carry over a lot of stuff from Firefox that was scrapped with the proton design.

    DarkThoughts ,

    I already switched to Firefox after Netscape.

    bluemite ,

    Skipped over the original Mozilla?

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