2 ms·

The ones that angered me were the surveillance and the inclusion of closed source DRM. Enough to get me to switch to LibreWolf.

by 9991 2y ago

torstenvl 2y ago
Don't forget the Mr. Robot malware.
arp242 2y ago
> inclusion of closed source DRM Because what people really want is a browser that can't use Netflix or Spotify... Firefox would no longer exist today if they hadn't included DRM. Ideological purity is fun and all, but it's perhaps a good idea to occasionally recognize reality.
- 9991 2y ago
  I would also never pay for DRMed media, so LibreWolf is a good fit for my use case. I don’t decide any one else’s use case.
phantomathkg 2y ago
> inclusion of closed source DRM Do you think if DRM is not included, will Firefox still retain 3% usage across the world? https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share Let's put it bluntly, but libre principle does not live well with consumerism of the modern world.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  So in exchange for their principles, they got to keep 3 whole percent of the market? That's a victory? I think that's a poor argument. However, I think the stronger argument is that in this case it's actually relatively okay. Like, it'd be a better world if DRM didn't exist, but given that they lack the market power to do anything about that, EME actually seems like the least bad option: * It's sandboxed. * It's optional and doesn't run by default. * Firefox prompts the user and asks if they want to run the DRM. In fairness, I understand that there are different views on this; I stop one tiny half-step shy of the GNU/FSF position, in that I would argue that people should have complete control of their machines, but that that includes the right to run software that doesn't respect their right to control the machine.
astiela 2y ago
The close sourced DRM is necessary for Netflix and a bunch of other apps, Also its provided for free to mozilla by google + cisco

The ones that angered me were the surveillance and the inclusion of closed source DRM. Enough to get me to switch to LibreWolf.

by 9991 2y ago

The ones that angered me were the surveillance and the inclusion of closed source DRM. Enough to get me to switch to LibreWolf.

torstenvl 2y ago

Don't forget the Mr. Robot malware.

arp242 2y ago

> inclusion of closed source DRM Because what people really want is a browser that can't use Netflix or Spotify... Firefox would no longer exist today if they hadn't included DRM. Ideological purity is fun and all, but it's perhaps a good idea to occasionally recognize reality.

9991 2y ago
I would also never pay for DRMed media, so LibreWolf is a good fit for my use case. I don’t decide any one else’s use case.

phantomathkg 2y ago

> inclusion of closed source DRM Do you think if DRM is not included, will Firefox still retain 3% usage across the world? https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share Let's put it bluntly, but libre principle does not live well with consumerism of the modern world.

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
So in exchange for their principles, they got to keep 3 whole percent of the market? That's a victory? I think that's a poor argument. However, I think the stronger argument is that in this case it's actually relatively okay. Like, it'd be a better world if DRM didn't exist, but given that they lack the market power to do anything about that, EME actually seems like the least bad option: * It's sandboxed. * It's optional and doesn't run by default. * Firefox prompts the user and asks if they want to run the DRM. In fairness, I understand that there are different views on this; I stop one tiny half-step shy of the GNU/FSF position, in that I would argue that people should have complete control of their machines, but that that includes the right to run software that doesn't respect their right to control the machine.

astiela 2y ago

The close sourced DRM is necessary for Netflix and a bunch of other apps, Also its provided for free to mozilla by google + cisco