4 ms·

Yes, thank you FSF for being the stronghold of my freedom. I was expecting Mozilla to keep standing with the same comprise, but they are disappointing me as use

Yes, thank you FSF for being the stronghold of my freedom. I was expecting Mozilla to keep standing with the same comprise, but they are disappointing me as user :-(

Touche 12y ago
Mozilla can't stand up for users if they don't have any.
- kaoD 12y ago
  They'd have me if they had stood up for me. I'll just stay in Chromium (edited, used to say just Chrome) I guess! If I'm going to get binary DRM blobs anyways, I'd rather use the best/fastest browser. EDIT: Please explain the downvotes! I won't know why you disagree or why I'm wrong if you just downvote and don't reply.
  - chimeracoder 12y ago
    > They'd have me if they had stood up for me. I'll just stay in Chrome I guess! The fact that you so readily admit that you'd rather just use a non-free browser[0] makes me doubt whether you'd actually be using Firefox even if they held out against DRM, rendering an increasing number of websites unviewable in Firefox. [0] Chrome, unlike Chromium, is not free or open source.
    - kaoD 12y ago
      I'd rather use the best browser. If Firefox sucks (I really don't want to rant about it) and doesn't even fight for their user's rights... why shouldn't I just use Chrome/ium[0]? I'm a switcher. I will stay with whoever offers the best browser or added value. Chrome is blazing fast for me and IMHO has better dev tools, which is why their browser is so popular. Mozilla's added value is their Foundation's goal, which they kind of betrayed accepting downloadable DRM blobs in their browser. I come back to Firefox from time to time just because I love Mozilla Foundation. DRM would be a great excuse to finally ditch Chrome forever. I'm not even mad about it and completely understand Mozilla's decision. I'm just sad I'm not coming back to Firefox because I'm having DRM blobs anyways. [0] When I said Chrome I meant Chrome/ium.
      - valarauca1 12y ago
        > Mozilla's added value is their Foundation's goal, which they kind of betrayed accepting downloadable DRM blobs in their browser. Chrome's goal is to use your browsing data to make money. I guess we can count on that principle to never be betrayed or compromised...
        kaoD 12y ago
        Did Chrome promise not to use your browsing data? If I'm going to get non-free blobs in my browser anyways, I'd rather use the best one.
        valarauca1 12y ago
        That's what I'm stating.. They promise nothing, and delivery nothing. I'd rather see my positive moral get challenged, then no morals be maintained.
        chimeracoder 12y ago
        > I'd rather see my positive moral get challenged, then no morals be maintained. If I remember correctly, Mozilla was very careful not to promise never to implement H.264, for this very reason. Anyway, if you really want a browser that has promised never to be non-free in anyway, and which you can count on to keep that promise, just use Iceweasel. It's essentially the same as Firefox with no proprietary blobs (Flash, DRM, etc.).
        drdaeman 12y ago
        > It's essentially the same as Firefox with no proprietary blobs (Flash, DRM, etc.). I had always thought Iceweasel was about Firefox branding (i.e. trademark, not copyright) issue. Mozilla had issues with some custom Firefox builds, so they asked to not call "Firefox" anything that wasn't build by them. Maybe I'm unaware of something, but at least I hadn't seen any Flash or DRM blobs in Firefox packaging. Blobs are Chrome/Chromium distinction. Oh, well, but if they're adding DRM to Firefox, guess that would be a new distinction between it and Iceweasel.
    - aragot 12y ago
      > Chrome, unlike Chromium, is not free or open source. How should we consider Chromium, knowing it is most probably used to serve Google's interests in terms of reporting, orientation, strategy, etc? Does it contain usage tracking code like Chrome?
      - valarauca1 12y ago
        Mandatory tracking was removed form Chromium in 2010 Opt-in tracking still exists.
  - sroerick 12y ago
    I'm probably switching to surf now. Anyone know a better option?
- yarrel 12y ago
  At present they're attacking them. Not having any users is better than that. For the users.
DCKing 12y ago
To be honest, it will probably be made very easy to you to not use the DRM components (remember that this will be a small plugin that you have to expressly install) or download a patched version that does not support EME at all. If, as a user, you feel the need to stick to principles it won't be a problem to do so. If you, as a user, want to decide what freedom means for other people, then that is a different story.

Yes, thank you FSF for being the stronghold of my freedom. I was expecting Mozilla to keep standing with the same comprise, but they are disappointing me as user :-(

Touche 12y ago

Mozilla can't stand up for users if they don't have any.

kaoD 12y ago
They'd have me if they had stood up for me. I'll just stay in Chromium (edited, used to say just Chrome) I guess! If I'm going to get binary DRM blobs anyways, I'd rather use the best/fastest browser. EDIT: Please explain the downvotes! I won't know why you disagree or why I'm wrong if you just downvote and don't reply.
- chimeracoder 12y ago
  > They'd have me if they had stood up for me. I'll just stay in Chrome I guess! The fact that you so readily admit that you'd rather just use a non-free browser[0] makes me doubt whether you'd actually be using Firefox even if they held out against DRM, rendering an increasing number of websites unviewable in Firefox. [0] Chrome, unlike Chromium, is not free or open source.
  - kaoD 12y ago
    I'd rather use the best browser. If Firefox sucks (I really don't want to rant about it) and doesn't even fight for their user's rights... why shouldn't I just use Chrome/ium[0]? I'm a switcher. I will stay with whoever offers the best browser or added value. Chrome is blazing fast for me and IMHO has better dev tools, which is why their browser is so popular. Mozilla's added value is their Foundation's goal, which they kind of betrayed accepting downloadable DRM blobs in their browser. I come back to Firefox from time to time just because I love Mozilla Foundation. DRM would be a great excuse to finally ditch Chrome forever. I'm not even mad about it and completely understand Mozilla's decision. I'm just sad I'm not coming back to Firefox because I'm having DRM blobs anyways. [0] When I said Chrome I meant Chrome/ium.
    - valarauca1 12y ago
      > Mozilla's added value is their Foundation's goal, which they kind of betrayed accepting downloadable DRM blobs in their browser. Chrome's goal is to use your browsing data to make money. I guess we can count on that principle to never be betrayed or compromised...
      - kaoD 12y ago
        Did Chrome promise not to use your browsing data? If I'm going to get non-free blobs in my browser anyways, I'd rather use the best one.
        valarauca1 12y ago
        That's what I'm stating.. They promise nothing, and delivery nothing. I'd rather see my positive moral get challenged, then no morals be maintained.
        chimeracoder 12y ago
        > I'd rather see my positive moral get challenged, then no morals be maintained. If I remember correctly, Mozilla was very careful not to promise never to implement H.264, for this very reason. Anyway, if you really want a browser that has promised never to be non-free in anyway, and which you can count on to keep that promise, just use Iceweasel. It's essentially the same as Firefox with no proprietary blobs (Flash, DRM, etc.).
        drdaeman 12y ago
        > It's essentially the same as Firefox with no proprietary blobs (Flash, DRM, etc.). I had always thought Iceweasel was about Firefox branding (i.e. trademark, not copyright) issue. Mozilla had issues with some custom Firefox builds, so they asked to not call "Firefox" anything that wasn't build by them. Maybe I'm unaware of something, but at least I hadn't seen any Flash or DRM blobs in Firefox packaging. Blobs are Chrome/Chromium distinction. Oh, well, but if they're adding DRM to Firefox, guess that would be a new distinction between it and Iceweasel.
  - aragot 12y ago
    > Chrome, unlike Chromium, is not free or open source. How should we consider Chromium, knowing it is most probably used to serve Google's interests in terms of reporting, orientation, strategy, etc? Does it contain usage tracking code like Chrome?
    - valarauca1 12y ago
      Mandatory tracking was removed form Chromium in 2010 Opt-in tracking still exists.
- sroerick 12y ago
  I'm probably switching to surf now. Anyone know a better option?
yarrel 12y ago
At present they're attacking them. Not having any users is better than that. For the users.

DCKing 12y ago

To be honest, it will probably be made very easy to you to not use the DRM components (remember that this will be a small plugin that you have to expressly install) or download a patched version that does not support EME at all. If, as a user, you feel the need to stick to principles it won't be a problem to do so. If you, as a user, want to decide what freedom means for other people, then that is a different story.