5 ms·

Lovely. Mozilla should be advancing the web in similar ways in Firefox.

1996 6y ago
Yes, Firefox need to focus on a usecase. It may not be able to beat chromium right now, but a working IPFS and TOR right inside your "vanilla" Firefox would give a compelling reason to keep it, when you can install chromium/chrome/edge and get better features - except this one!
- wolverine876 6y ago
  > working IPFS and TOR right inside your "vanilla" Firefox would give a compelling reason to keep it For 3 people? I don't think IPFS is going to impact market share. Firefox does provide privacy.
  - waynesonfire 6y ago
    lol right
  - realdense 6y ago
    > Firefox does provide privacy. Really? Most people who use Firefox are still exposed to tracking. Google is still the default search engine and promoted via Firefox Home, and continues to track the large majority of users who don't change their default. Pretty sure Facebook and Twitter are promoted via the default home page as well. Third party cookies, browser profiling and other tracking mechanisms have barely been addressed. Mozilla seems more focused on lip service, shameless self-promotion and double speak than addressing the problem. The so-called free web is a joke, it's a web of giants, and companies like Mozilla who are mere pawns in their protection racket.
josteink 6y ago
They’re too busy taking down MDN, firing talented engineers, diverse-hiring non-developers and funding feminist Wordpress-setup camps these days for that to ever happen. Mozilla today is not the Mozilla we knew.
- Fellshard 6y ago
  I believe that's what we call 'ideological capture'.
- wolverine876 6y ago
  Well that assumes that inclusion in the open Internet is a bad idea. I think it helps the Internet, Mozilla, the industry, our society, and provides opportunity to talented people who otherwise wouldn't have it. Also, as you probably know, many of those things you mention are caused by lack of funds.
  - josteink 6y ago
    > Also, as you probably know, many of those things you mention are caused by lack of funds. When you are short on funds to do all the things you want to do, you have to prioritize. It's my opinion that Mozilla is prioritizing the wrong things if they want to remain relevant. What does it matter what good things they plan to do, if they will be gone in a year or two?

1996 6y ago

Yes, Firefox need to focus on a usecase. It may not be able to beat chromium right now, but a working IPFS and TOR right inside your "vanilla" Firefox would give a compelling reason to keep it, when you can install chromium/chrome/edge and get better features - except this one!

wolverine876 6y ago
> working IPFS and TOR right inside your "vanilla" Firefox would give a compelling reason to keep it For 3 people? I don't think IPFS is going to impact market share. Firefox does provide privacy.
- waynesonfire 6y ago
  lol right
- realdense 6y ago
  > Firefox does provide privacy. Really? Most people who use Firefox are still exposed to tracking. Google is still the default search engine and promoted via Firefox Home, and continues to track the large majority of users who don't change their default. Pretty sure Facebook and Twitter are promoted via the default home page as well. Third party cookies, browser profiling and other tracking mechanisms have barely been addressed. Mozilla seems more focused on lip service, shameless self-promotion and double speak than addressing the problem. The so-called free web is a joke, it's a web of giants, and companies like Mozilla who are mere pawns in their protection racket.

josteink 6y ago

They’re too busy taking down MDN, firing talented engineers, diverse-hiring non-developers and funding feminist Wordpress-setup camps these days for that to ever happen. Mozilla today is not the Mozilla we knew.

Fellshard 6y ago
I believe that's what we call 'ideological capture'.
wolverine876 6y ago
Well that assumes that inclusion in the open Internet is a bad idea. I think it helps the Internet, Mozilla, the industry, our society, and provides opportunity to talented people who otherwise wouldn't have it. Also, as you probably know, many of those things you mention are caused by lack of funds.
- josteink 6y ago
  > Also, as you probably know, many of those things you mention are caused by lack of funds. When you are short on funds to do all the things you want to do, you have to prioritize. It's my opinion that Mozilla is prioritizing the wrong things if they want to remain relevant. What does it matter what good things they plan to do, if they will be gone in a year or two?