4 ms·

How about it becomes a squeaky clean non-profit, gets classified as a digital public good and gets funded by the widest collection of public sector / ngo's. We

How about it becomes a squeaky clean non-profit, gets classified as a digital public good and gets funded by the widest collection of public sector / ngo's. We are talking about the literal window to the digital world, with potentially billions of users. Its a dysfunctional world that cant sort out funding for such a super-critical software piece and has let adtech have this charade and fig leaf of "browser competition" going on for so long. A chromium based solution would double down on the monoculture. If anything now is the time to envision what a users-first browser should be like, not what adtech wants it to be. From wasm to fediverse and (dare I say) AI, its a good time to snap out of the stagnation.

idunnoman1222 2y ago
Checks welcome
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  Are they? AFAIK there is still no way to fund Firefox the browser.
- isaacremuant 2y ago
  Problem is that they've told for too long that they didn't want money or people who didn't align with one specific USA political party so I can understand if people don't come rushing in to try and contribute. It's unfortunate since Firefox is key to an open internet but at some point, they lost their true way and now it's going to take a lot of effort to regain it.
  - paulryanrogers 2y ago
    > ...didn't want money or people who didn't align with one specific USA political party... Was it ever about party? I thought it was more about executives who donated to bigoted causes.
    - bigfatkitten 2y ago
      And even then, wasn't it just one guy (who's long gone)?
      - isaacremuant 2y ago
        Brendan Eich is a fundamental guy, maybe read his contribution to the space and, I love how you support injustice by trying to downplay the targets of said injustice.
    - isaacremuant 2y ago
      Yes. 100% purely about party since that party calls their opponents bigots no matter what. The hypocritical response and blame game after the US elections shows that calling others bigot is projecting more than anything else.
  - hulitu 2y ago
    > It's unfortunate since Firefox is key to an open internet Was. A long time ago. Now it is only an extension of Google ("safe" browsing) used by enthousiasts (who do not want to hear that Mozilla is now an advertising company).
jules-jules 2y ago
Please, please please make it happen.

idunnoman1222 2y ago

Checks welcome

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
Are they? AFAIK there is still no way to fund Firefox the browser.
isaacremuant 2y ago
Problem is that they've told for too long that they didn't want money or people who didn't align with one specific USA political party so I can understand if people don't come rushing in to try and contribute. It's unfortunate since Firefox is key to an open internet but at some point, they lost their true way and now it's going to take a lot of effort to regain it.
- paulryanrogers 2y ago
  > ...didn't want money or people who didn't align with one specific USA political party... Was it ever about party? I thought it was more about executives who donated to bigoted causes.
  - bigfatkitten 2y ago
    And even then, wasn't it just one guy (who's long gone)?
    - isaacremuant 2y ago
      Brendan Eich is a fundamental guy, maybe read his contribution to the space and, I love how you support injustice by trying to downplay the targets of said injustice.
  - isaacremuant 2y ago
    Yes. 100% purely about party since that party calls their opponents bigots no matter what. The hypocritical response and blame game after the US elections shows that calling others bigot is projecting more than anything else.
- hulitu 2y ago
  > It's unfortunate since Firefox is key to an open internet Was. A long time ago. Now it is only an extension of Google ("safe" browsing) used by enthousiasts (who do not want to hear that Mozilla is now an advertising company).

jules-jules 2y ago

Please, please please make it happen.