this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
440 points (96.4% liked)

Firefox

17937 readers
38 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

sigh

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 58 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I genuinely believe that the Mozilla board is secretly working for Google. They already get most of their funding from that search engine deal, is a backroom agreement to slowly run the organization into the ground in order to force the last holdouts over to Chrome that hard to believe?

[–] Rozauhtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Don't ascribe intention where incompetence is enough.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's better to treat incompetence as maliciousness, than to treat maliciousness as incompetence.

The benefit of the doubt should only apply in the absence of a longstanding pattern of behavior to the contrary.

IMO Mozilla has run out of goodwill.

[–] aaaaace@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

IMO Alphabet has run out of goodwill by abusing their market dominance in a more overt way.

Looking forward to more aggressive action by FTC, note that tech donors have asked Harris for Lina Khan's removal as a quid pro quo.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The key point is the courts only generally care about antitrust issues if they're adversely affecting the consumer, and alphabet is starting to get into that territory.

[–] aaaaace@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago

Lina's got her radar pointed...

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago

Exactly

They are just good at burning money and getting nothing done

[–] servobobo@feddit.nl 17 points 2 months ago

It's in Google's interest to keep Firefox/Mozilla alive to skirt antitrust laws, so any backdoor deal would be more making Chrome alternatives not look too attractive while keeping them on life support.

[–] romp_2_door@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

I don't think they're working for Google but I'm convinced that they're trying to setup their own advertising business

Trying to get some of that sweet ad revenue money

but Google controls so much of everything that of course they're indirectly funded by Google, so it may look like they're working for Google

In this Tecnofeudalist reality that we live in, we all indirectly work for our feudal lords Google / Meta / Amazon. We are granted their grace and allowed to exist in their server space and use their internet cables. In return we have to work the land and give our data as a tribute.