disable on Settings > Home > Shortcuts > Sponsored Shortcuts. on by default. why even use it at this point jesus

Show thread

@kate how do you think firefox makes money 😆
wait till you discover most of Mozilla's funding comes from Google paying to be the default search engine

@kate Haven't they been doing this for at least a year now?
@galena @kate gotta pay the CEOs full bonus somehow. doing a good job isn't on the table :blobcatdunno:
@kate eeeeeeeeh ಠ_ಠ Mozilla ffs... making me consider switching to LibreWolf once more..

about:config → browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.showSponsored → switch false
browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.showSponsoredTopSites → switch false

@kate I screamed when this first happened to me, some updates ago.

@kate Might I suggest you make a browser as great as Firefox, keep up with the updates, security issues and new features without *any* sponsoring like this for at least a few years before criticizing their approach?

It's easy to blame others without stepping in their shoes.

@kura @kate there's an about:config setting that completely removes suggestions

I really love the Mastodon ad! They should put it first.

@kate It's easily disabled. I'm not a fan of it, but they have to make money somehow.

And at this point they're vastly losing, so there might come a time in the near future where we don't have a choice and can't disable this stuff.

So I still appreciate the Firefox team for all the hardwork and keeping the browser free and allowing easy ways to disable this stuff.

@ozoned @kate Mozilla also had huge layoffs in 2020, so I'm not surprised.

@trueneutralocto @kate

That's scary. I seriously don't want to think of a world without someone like @mozilla there to try to keep the internet open and free.


Free Software isn't free (as beer) to produce, but do Mozilla really need to pay million-dollars salaries to its top executives ?

Maybe if they stopped doing that they'll find themselves with enough money to maintain a good web browser...


@Iutech @kate

I don't know what they NEED to do, because I don't work there. But it seems like you have the solution to their problems. Have you attempted to get a job there? Have you attempted to contribute to the code base to help make it a good web browser? I'm sure they'd be happy to hear your suggestions that you can solve their money problems.

@Iutech @ozoned @kate

technically firefox may still be the "best" browser, but it's due to browsers degrading generally... at most i would say firefox has a "barely passing" score.

its ui is largely uncustomizable. and they continue to make unconfigurable bad ui decisions. i feel very sad about this.
@ozoned @kate oh please.
Mozilla is well off thanks to Google's money.

What will you do next? Defend a thief because he has to feed himself and his family in hard times and be glad he is trying his best to not kill others in order to survive?

@kate Looks like they're desperate for funds. It is alarming, and we should support ff somehow.
If ff fails, the web will remain chromium-only (except maybe caves of gemini). That would leave google alone to set all the rules. Somewhat doomsday scenario. So don't be too picky and keep supporting ff. If they fail in funding, we all will get ads in chromium address bar or something worse.

@dudenas @kate As far as I'm concerned Google is already setting all the rules!

I wish Mozilla the best of luck in holding this back as long as possible, but unfortunately they find themselves having to make these compromises. I don't think they can do what it takes to save the web without losing what influence they still have...

@alcinnz @kate I still think their influence depends on our attitude. In this case to ads. If they are opt-in, we could just opt-in. I have no problem getting to know relevant businesses - most of info on the web is irrelevant anyway. If that could be done without tracking (e.g. subscribing to keywords) I'd probably prefer that instead of micropayments and instead google's monopoly of course.

@alcinnz @kate

Another thing - open source software, especially as crucial as ff, can be clearly classified as public good. It is weird how there is no political will to appreciate and fund it. At least in countries I see. Is it because there is no demand from voters? Maybe there is demand, but not yet articulated?

Most people don't know or care. I'm always surprised when people recognise ubuntu or Firefox. They know brands, not the political philosophy of FLOSS. When people do know, it's been because of social interactions with people in FLOSS. Sometimes the impression hasn't been positive for them. We have a collective responsibility for this if we want to inform people about FLOSS and how it benefits the public
@alcinnz @kate

Movements take time, especially when it's across a spectrum of different ideas of what software freedom is about. It's only when we can align our goals broadly that there's momentum to push for change.
@alcinnz @kate

@onepict @dudenas @alcinnz @kate

Ha, I was just about to mention @yogthos and their toot to the EU article

Good news indeed, and let's hope some very positive developments flow from here.

Yeah great minds think alike, or fools 😉. Although I think the movement for a common good would be supported by citizens generally. But it does rely of grass roots as much as the media, and politicians. Social contact is the best way to counter. Folks always yearn for community.
@dudenas @alcinnz @kate @yogthos

@onepict ha ha. Yes, community is crucial, and I think we can improve much further still in representing them online, especially on the fediverse. There's big interest in the 'common good' and grassroots movements small and large are everywhere. With the right mindset you stumble upon tons of positive development. But all is very fragmented and reinventing wheels. Also 'communities of action' where actual stuff happens, are much harder to establish and foster.

@dudenas @alcinnz @kate @yogthos

@dudenas @alcinnz @kate
Now as much as I'm skeptical about change happening from the outside, the news that @webmink and Amanda Brock of Open UK will be on the Open Standards board in the UK is a good start. We need to work together to influence all levels of society. From local governments to parliaments. I hope this is the start of more FLOSS in our public services.

@onepict @dudenas @alcinnz @kate
I've been testing the use of the word SOSS or secure open source software. The "free" in FOSS always has to be explained. Also everyone is now inundated with news of security breaches every so "Secure" resonates.

I do quite like the concept of libre myself, as free can mean different things. I'm a bit wary of the term secure as yes we do have security in the concept and many eyes can help with that. However the term can be misused as much by FLOSS projects as by proprietary player in the industry. So I'd be a bit worried when we had the next heartbleed etc. Although it is an interesting concept as a term.
@dudenas @alcinnz @kate

@onepict @dudenas @alcinnz @kate People flock to brandname software. Chrome isn’t better then FF, but it’s from Google which people perceive as better/cooler/hipper.

Or they’re looking for a free clone of some propriety software, and they aren’t willing to put up with any shortcomings, perceived or otherwise.

@dudenas @kate Agreed!

Personally I'm interested in exploring/demonstrating an alternative future for the web which doesn't require near as much effort & funding... That's what I see as what Mozilla can't do without loosing their influence...

> I It is weird how there is no political will to appreciate and fund it. At least in countries I see. Is it because there is no demand from voters? Maybe there is demand, but not yet articulated?

I tried to do my bit by emailing the tech spokespeople in NZ political parties a link to Nadia Eghbal's 'Roads and Bridges' report, with a bit of contextualizing comment about why it's important they read it.

@dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict @humanetech

#NadiaEghbal #funding

@strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict @humanetech

Except that roads and bridges are not exactly virtual or electronic infrastructure, just to add to the confusion.. Tell a politician about virtualization and they immediately think about money.

@strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict @humanetech
Perhaps the Common Browser proposal should open with the line: The Common Browser Programme is not about money.

@strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict @humanetech @aral

So far just the idea has been floated, but apparently the need for it will become real. I would be very interested in this, also as an antidote to those who claim that open source is automagically commons, because most of the open sources have not been created by commoners. (see )

@gert @strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict @aral

Slightly OT.. I saw that Drew Devault started working on visurf, based on NetSurf and intends to create a HTML + CSS framework specifically targeted to smaller browsers as 1st-class citizens.

@humanetech @strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict @aral

There are many flaws that come to mind, but the "security" model of the browser with its central authority and the resulting burocracy is totally rediculous IMO.

@humanetech @gert @strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict Sadly, without client-side (you know, the side YOU control) JavaScript, it can’t be used to implement small web sites (how are you going to ensure your keys are held only by you?) The problem is trusting servers. Client-side JS that you own and control, if you can verify the source, isn’t the problem, it’s actually the solution to protecting your privacy on the web.

@aral @humanetech @gert @strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict

The key point here is ”if you can verify the source”. This is in practice impossible, and JS is executed as the page loads. We can’t expect people to inspect the source code of every page before rendering.

I don’t see why JS is needed to implement small sites. I only use it for and even then only for a nicer UX. It could as well have been an ordinary web form.

@tinyrabbit @humanetech @gert @strypey @dudenas @alcinnz @kate @onepict It is not impossible, it’s just not possible within the confines of current browsers. Entirely possible via an extension or third-party app, etc.

We need it for Small Web ( because there’s no other way for you to own your own keys or ensure that your content is end-to-end encrypted.

Hm, It may make sense as a longshot. But almost nobody can perform security audit on their own. That means, you need to trust someone's agency. As I think of it, a perfect model would be the one, where I could choose my agent I trust to verify content for me.

On client side, probably most antivirus software claim to audit web content.. But I admit, I usually consider them more annoying than most viruses.

@tinyrabbit @humanetech @gert @strypey @alcinnz @kate @onepict

@dudenas @tinyrabbit @humanetech @gert @strypey @alcinnz @kate @onepict Well, there’s verification and there’s verification. I’m not talking about source code audit but at least verifying that the signature of the file matches what the organisation you trusts says it should be. Beyond that, yes, a bigger issue is having trusted agents that actually perform things like source code audits.

Sign in to participate in the conversation