3 ms·

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity. I feel its far more likely Google devs are just lazy and don't b

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity. I feel its far more likely Google devs are just lazy and don't bother to test in Firefox, much like devs at pretty much every company these days. Unfortunate, but (probably) not part of some deliberate evil plan.

eitland 2y ago
At a certain size, making sure ones company doesn't destroy whole ecosystems should be a management responsibility. Also, as pointed out by others, when again and again these stupidities benefits the bottom line there is good reason to ask if someone somewhere doesn't have a bonus that goes up with every mistake.
aragilar 2y ago
On the other hand: https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has-sabotaged-firefox-for-years/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has...
hollow-moe 2y ago
this is right for individuals, not corporations like those where every single decision is reviewed in meetings. you should actually apply the opposite for them : guilty unless proven innocent
wffurr 2y ago
Devs are lazy, but management systematically underfunds the web test team to keep it difficult to test on other browsers.
sloowm 2y ago
Never apply Hanlon's razor to that which can be adequately be explained by disregard for the consequences.
QuadmasterXLII 2y ago
Sufficiently profitable stupidity is indistinguishable from malice
passwordoops 2y ago
No I think the lack of testing is due to laziness but a concerted effort to minimally test FF. Which comes down to malice. Now, if YT and Chrome were distaste companies, then we might not have this problem...
danaris 2y ago
Hanlon's Razor is for applying to single instances. When you have a long-standing pattern of behavior, you need to start using critical thinking, instead. Is there a benefit to Google from breaking Firefox? Yes, clearly. Does Google have the technical competency to avoid breaking Firefox if they want to? I would say this is very likely. If you misapply Hanlon's Razor where it's no longer appropriate, you're liable to cut yourself off from the truth.

eitland 2y ago

At a certain size, making sure ones company doesn't destroy whole ecosystems should be a management responsibility. Also, as pointed out by others, when again and again these stupidities benefits the bottom line there is good reason to ask if someone somewhere doesn't have a bonus that goes up with every mistake.

aragilar 2y ago

On the other hand: https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has-sabotaged-firefox-for-years/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has...

hollow-moe 2y ago

this is right for individuals, not corporations like those where every single decision is reviewed in meetings. you should actually apply the opposite for them : guilty unless proven innocent

wffurr 2y ago

Devs are lazy, but management systematically underfunds the web test team to keep it difficult to test on other browsers.

sloowm 2y ago

Never apply Hanlon's razor to that which can be adequately be explained by disregard for the consequences.

QuadmasterXLII 2y ago

Sufficiently profitable stupidity is indistinguishable from malice

passwordoops 2y ago

No I think the lack of testing is due to laziness but a concerted effort to minimally test FF. Which comes down to malice. Now, if YT and Chrome were distaste companies, then we might not have this problem...

danaris 2y ago

Hanlon's Razor is for applying to single instances. When you have a long-standing pattern of behavior, you need to start using critical thinking, instead. Is there a benefit to Google from breaking Firefox? Yes, clearly. Does Google have the technical competency to avoid breaking Firefox if they want to? I would say this is very likely. If you misapply Hanlon's Razor where it's no longer appropriate, you're liable to cut yourself off from the truth.