Also, #Vivaldi now has its own #Mastodon instance. I think #Brave Browser had an unofficial instance at one time, and #Mozilla intends to open theirs early in 2023.
I'm still not "there" yet, but I am doing some #PHP stuff. Maybe I'll be able to help make !GNUsocial and #Friendica competitive candidates for $ORGANIZATION deploying their own #Fediverse presence.
A lot of us are concerned about #Firefox, about #Thunderbird, and about #Mozilla itself. The trouble is, most of the seeds of Moz's current affliction were planted early on, when the #Google search deal was first signed.
They received an unimaginable amount of money, and being good people, they decided to pour it into becoming the Web's advocate and (later on) the Web's privacy advocate.
They built a large organization, with some very high salaries at the top, based on the revenue they received from a single customer. And then that customer launched its own browser, #Chrome, in part because Firefox was going slower than Google desired because so many resources were going into other projects and because Google's plans were not always aligned with what Mozilla believed was best for the Web.
It was always an unsustainable situation, and when things changed due to cooperation being replaced with coopetition, they started a panicked grasping for other revenue sources.
Now, they've cut actual developers, which makes it even more difficult to keep up with Chrome / #Chromium (and the many browsers derived from it). And because they need to find other revenue sources, they keep looking for ad deals ... which runs crosswise with its core users, who want to block ads.
So, yeah, I don't see a way out that leaves them as anything other than a niche product produced by a small team of mostly volunteers.
I do think _personalization_ as a differentiator is going to flop, if they're thinking about color schemes and superhero logos. A big chunk of what people did with XUL (the former technology, and what made it so customizable) was produce ad blockers, script blockers, embedded-media blockers, pop-up blockers, cookie and tracking blockers, proxy tools, and web development tools (webdev toolbars, xml toolbars, json tools, css and xsl tools, sqlite tools). I just don't think that the ability to make your browser look like the Spiderman t-shirt you bought last week is going to win over a lot of people who are using Chrome/Chomium/Edge/Opera/Vivaldi/Brave/Iron.
Now, maybe if they make it the most secure and private browser right out of the box, with ad blocking, script blocking, and so on, plus make it faster than the Chromium family while consuming less RAM and crashing less often, then adding the ability to dress the browser up as Dora the Explorer will total enough advantages to make a difference.
Starts with a comparison of #Firefox market share and the pay of #Mozilla's top executive
I did not search for it, but around the time they laid off 1/4 of their workforce, I thought I saw something about some pay reductions for their top management.
My personal assessment is this: as the browser started picking up share, they also picked up a patron (Google) that seemed to provide unlimited funding. It was during this period that all the "privacy NGO" ideas started, because they had more than enough money for their main projects and decided they'd spend the rest "doing good".
I can't fault them for that. But I do think that Mozilla's current state is pretty closely related to having "grown up" with unlimited money to spend on tangentially related projects.
At some point, Google decided that their interests were better served with an owned-and-controlled browser, and the rest is history.
There's always the hope that Mozilla will open up more Firefox and #Thunderbird development to non-paid programmers and start asking its users to optionally contribute financially. This could help, but there still needs to be a soul-searching that asks whether they are a group that develops a browser and a mail client or some sort of generic web and privacy advocacy group that just happens to develop those applications.
Those are two different roads, and with a much more constrained income stream, they can't be both at once any more.
When I write these things, I’m not trying to condemn #Mozilla. Once their primary funder also became their primary competitor, the handwriting was on the wall.
Unless a new fiscal beneficiary suddenly appears or one of these money-making products catches on, their future is bleak. Probably the last hope is to make Firefox code understandable enough that the user community can take over maintenance and keep the browser going.
The decisions that #Mozilla made in their search for more money have not made things better, either. They integrated #Pocket into Firefox and eventually purchased Pocket, but privacy-aware people have always considered Pocket and similar software to be dangerous. Thus, “use Firefox, the privacy-oriented browser” becomes “avoid Firefox unless you turn off their data-collection and Pocket” ... and its refusal to integrate ad-blocking leads to Brave and similar browsers’ ability to brag about their integrated ad-blocking, despite their own privacy flaws. (They did recently turn on enhanced tracking-blocking, but they’re behind the Apple and some others on this.)
I think I’ve written this before, but back in their heyday, #Mozilla was flying high, driven by the funds coming from its search deal with #Google. When the GOOG started to cut back and then launched a competing browser, Moz panicked (rightly) because all the high-sounding promises they made were predicated on this huge level of funding that went away.
Now that #Firefox holds a small sliver of its former market share, and nearly all of its competitors build upon Google’s code (which forked from Apple’s code, which itself was forked from KDE’s code), the going is rough and getting rougher.
#Mozilla, this ad leaves me conflicted. If #Facebook is accepting racist ads, then, yes, I want them to stop. If they have people posting racist posts, I want them to stop the worst ones, but people who hold / exhibit some lesser levels of racism may be won over to anti-racism if people can see what they're thinking and engage with them.
There's a person in the US Midwest, age in the mid-twenties, that I've allowed to remain in my timelines despite his use of racist terms (e.g., the N-word) and occasional posting of anti-Jewish memes. Why? I'm hoping that he eventually recognizes the value of people who may not share the same ancestral background as he does.
If he was subject to strict hate speech rules, he'd soon be banished to some alt-right racists' forum and be convinced to bomb some other ethnic group's congregating points as part of a "fight for racial purity".
On the other hand, there's a guy that was so racist that he got kicked off of Gab. When he first joined the Fediverse, he was talking about committing violent racist acts. For all I know, he may still be doing so, if he's found an instance that will allow that. That guy is already too far gone ... there's little chance that he could be convinced to abandon racism OR violence, so restricting him from every possible channel makes it easier for the FBI to track him.
I guess I'm saying that there's a balance that must be struck. I don't want _real_ nazis spewing their hate on the platforms that people use, but an ignorant young person that just hasn't ever lived where they must interact with people of other ancestries could get better if people unlike them start relating to them. https://n5.federati.net/attachment/6176
@clacke loads of #libre#commons organisations have been gradually corporatized like this, resulting in unprincipled decisions being made for staff convenience, pleasing funders etc. #CC being colonized by #Slack, #Mozilla shipping #Firefox with #SurveillanceCapitalism search engines and allowing proprietary bits to creep into it (eg Adobe EME module), Linux Foundation ... well ... heaps of examples there, see #TechRights.org.