Changing World, Changing Mozilla – The Mozilla Blog
blog.mozilla.org
external-link

This is a time of change for the internet and for Mozilla. From combatting a lethal virus and battling systemic racism to protecting individual privacy — one thing is clear: …

Apparently Mozilla suffered financially from the COVID-19 crisis. I hope this doesn’t mean that Firefox and other Mozilla products will fall behind the competition.

@yogthos
1710M

This is a very unfortunate news. Firefox is basically the only viable alternative to Chrome at this point, and if Mozilla folds then Google will become the gatekeeper of the internet. I would encourage anybody who’s able to donate to Mozilla and encourage others to do so. The web is just too important to be owned by an ad company.

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
1010M

Yeah, other browsers are either Chromium based or proprietary. Firefox is likely the FLOSS project with the widest user base (in terms of non tech users). It’s situation in the smartphone market is already quite bad. It’s probably one of the most valuable companies in the FLOSS universe.

Dessalines
admin
710M

It is really sad. We’d be lost without firefox. The browser is the most used application on any system, and being locked to chrome, IE, or safari, which are all deeply connected to the US state, would be a terrible thing.

@koavf
510M

And there niche browsers, of course like Lynx, Otter, Pale Moon, etc. but those are not realistic choices for taking on Blink/Chromium-based supremacy. Mozilla in general and Firefox in particular are critical for the health of the Web.

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
510M

Lynx and other browsers without JS are unusable since nowadays every website requires a shitton of JS just to display basic text content.

Webpages are so bloated today. The average webpage today is bigger than Doom.

@koavf
210M

Can you give me an e.g. of something unusable? Web mail interfaces (e.g. Gmail) work just fine without scripting and my understanding is that most social media does as well, even if some of the functionality is definitely missing.

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
510M

Well I block most JS by default and I can tell you, it breaks pretty much everything. Even newspapers/blogs that just display text don’t render properly without JS enabled.

Ephera
410M

Well, literally this webpage that we’re on right now, for one. PeerTube is another one in the libre space that shows nothing without JavaScript.

There’s a thousand more examples in the non-libre space, but I’d frankly rather not go to those webpages to try this out.

@Echedenyan
110M

I think you are confused with the HTML view for GMail. The main interface is directly bloated.

W3Schools main page is also that but in other sense and their code is a mess of CSS with unrecommended things. And like every page you could check of a company built for their own to be exact. Mostly these boostraped-style single webpage with a lot of animations and js involved as well as extra nonsense requests to any Goolag service.

@Echedenyan
-110M

Well, Pale Moon is not just a ‘niche browser’: http://thereisonlyxul.org/

@koavf
610M

Pale Moon’s market share is part of 0.04% and is developed by a single person who is using a years-old fork of Gecko. That is 100% a “niche” by any rational definition.

@Echedenyan
1
edit-2
10M

Given that is part of Firefox you can include it in their quota for general use (as user agent use to be set like Firefox for site compatibility in most cases and most trackers identify it as Firefox directly) and avoid the ‘market share’ technicism.

It is also not developed by just a person, that is a big lie: https://github.com/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon (and no, only repo and moving there is new, never was developed by just a person, maybe just in the first year but the official forum is filled of other contributions from a lot of time ago)

@koavf
310M

What percentage of Web traffic goes to Pale Moon browsers?

Ephera
210M

They still backport a lot of patches from Mozilla, though, do they not? So, they would still suffer immensely, if Firefox development stopped or slowed down.

@Echedenyan
1
edit-2
10M

No, they sometimes take them in account as extra help but that was mostly for Basilisk side in the begining. They are not dependent of that AFAIK.

@jsgohac
410M

Very sad indeed, but this (and the roadmap outlined in the article) does not sound like an organization about to fold:

This will strengthen our ability to build and invest in products and services that will give people alternatives to conventional Big Tech.

@yogthos
410M

Yeah, they’re still going to have around over 700 people there, so I don’t think there’s any imminent danger of Mozilla folding.

@Echedenyan
2
edit-2
10M

We still have GNOME Web too see how it goes with the faulty features. (Well, on GNU/Linux only)

And from Firefox, well http://thereisonlyxul.org/ illustrates some point… and everything is multiplatform…

@yogthos
410M

It’s true, but keeping party with Chrome really does take a big org. Another possible alternative is that we might see a split with the commercial internet. I honestly don’t think that would be a bad thing at this point.

@jsgohac
5
edit-2
10M

My highly biased opinion is that they should be laser focused on becoming the webs most secure and private browser. Redeploy the resources that are working on pocket, custom home tabs, questionable vpns, secure send and other non-core browser features into growing their existing low-memory, fast rendering core into something that truly protects privacy and keeps up with vulnerabilities out of the box. I would gladly pay a relatively high amount for that.

@yogthos
310M

Privacy focused market is certainly growing nowadays, so making that the focus would make sense. This would also be a clear differentiator from Chrome. Mozilla has already been promoting this aspect as well, so it would be natural to make that the focus. I do think they need to find some clear sustainable monetization strategy around that though.

@jsgohac
210M

True, some basic back of the napkin math shows even if 100,000 users initially bought modest licenses, they could’t even fund a small dev team. Maybe falkon or another community project will rise up.

@bluefish009
410M

firefox need some solid business model, i think there is some chance link firefox with AI/Machine Learning market. hope they stay well.

@koavf
210M

They have recurring revenue with Mozilla VPN and Scroll, so that is something but I of course have no data on how many actual subscribers there are other than me.

@hawkield
3
edit-2
10M

What is worse is that any of this could have been avoided if they had stuck to doing browser (instead of Pocket, AI, Marketing, Rebranding, Firefox OS, voice recognition, AI stuff)

I cannot express my hate and disgust into words when CEO of a non-profit still gets paid millions of dollars and workers get fired. And when someone asks why is it so, the CEO answers “we have families and bills to pay for”. https://answers.thenextweb.com/s/mitchell-baker-aGY62z

Mozilla should be turned into COOP

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
510M

I partially disagree with you. Offering other products than Firefox is probably the best change Mozilla has at getting a revenue source that isn’t Google. Pocket and Mozilla VPN try to fix this, and i dream of a world where Mozilla doesn’t depend on Google.

Projects like Mozilla common voice are vital if we want to have FLOSS products that can be competitive with Alexa, Google Home etc…

I dislike CEOs being paid that much, but this is a greater societal issue, and not one that Mozilla pledged to fight.

@HD_Potato
3
edit-2
4M

deleted by creator

@koavf
210M

Donating to the Mozilla Foundation does not directly lead to work by the Mozilla Corporation. I am currently subscribed to Mozilla VPN (monthly), Pocket (annually), and Scroll (monthly): does anyone know of any other ways to support the commercial arm of Mozilla other than creating my own search engine to rival Google and bid up the default search position?

@work_at_google
2
edit-2
10M

Why do you want to support the commercial arm? Isn’t it the one that got them in trouble?

@koavf
210M

Because they need to survive. The commercial arm is what keeps the Firefox browser afloat along with several other development activities—the Foundation does activism, fights for standards, does awareness campaigns, etc. Other than Pocket, Scroll, and the VPN, I don’t think there’s any other way to funnel money into the the Corporation. :/

I see you’re a fan of trickle down economics!

@koavf
110M

?

@Wheeljack
210M

So what are the likely implications and consequences of this for us? Does this mean that Firefox will receive less updates? That it will become more commercialized? That’s it’s soon dead in the water? No real change?

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
210M

I think that Mozilla is financially not going very well, but unless they loose the deal making Google their default search engine (which represents a significant part of their income), it is unlikely that Mozilla and Firefox will die.

@koavf
310M

Sources claim that they will re-up.

@lemming99
210M

Hopefully some of them will return to their roots and contribute to UXP

@gaz
110M

It seems to be kinda dead?

@Echedenyan
2
edit-2
10M

Where?:

Don’t forget to check all the branches, issues and pull requests for these cases in which a person could shit in ‘OH, THEY TOOK LAST COMMIT 8 DAYS AGO ON MAIN BRANCH, THAT IS LOW FREQUENCY’.

Anyways, for MoonChild Productions, main repo is UXP and the other ones are just the specific code for every build.

degoogle!

@ybaumy
4
edit-2
9M

deleted by creator

Well http3 already goes away with IPs which would replace the need of VPNS. Unfortunately http3’s adoption is very slow.

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
2
edit-2
10M

Why would HTTP/3 remove the need for a VPN ? If you don’t want the server to see your real IP, for privacy reasons or to access geo-restricted content, you still need a VPN.

@jsgohac
110M

I have heard surprizingly little on http3. Do you have any good resources on the IP implications?

Wikipedia has an understandably general description without much detail.

Found this interesting, though it earlier said its not prime time

Stable versions of Firefox and Chrome support HTTP/3 in its current form, but have it disabled by default. Safari 14 will ship with HTTP/3 enabled by default.

Dreeg Ocedam
creator
2
edit-2
10M

This talk taught me a lot about HTTP/3 (and other versions too).

I only vaguely knew how http worked at the time so it was really interesting.

One of the things is that HTTP/3 doesn’t rely on IP to identify a connection, but IP is still used behind the scenes. The goal is to be able transition between multiple network interfaces (thus changing IP) without loosing the connection. That’s useful for example when going from 4G to wifi.

If my understanding is correct, VPNs will stay very much relevant with HTTP/3.

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

  • 0 users online
  • 2 users / day
  • 4 users / week
  • 53 users / month
  • 150 users / 6 months
  • 1566 subscribers
  • 157 Posts
  • 712 Comments
  • Modlog