• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    10515 days ago

    This is surely a smokescreen for Google’s monopolization of Internet standards.

    And even if weren’t, I cannot emphasize enough how much that list of companies should also NOT be in charge of setting open standards. Oligopoly, monopoly with the illusion of choice…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -615 days ago

      Oh, surely.

      Wait. Non-profits looking to shepherd the upstream used by a dozen derivatives; that’s BAD now?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -3815 days ago

      Whoa whoa. Let’s pick up the build of Mozilla’s ditched namesake and confirm a future there, and then maybe consider their next discard. Wait; who’s got tbird? Can we rescue that first? Get their trash in ‘tip’ order, anyway.

      • @ikidd
        link
        English
        3615 days ago

        Thunderbird and Firefox are fine, very actively maintained and adding features.

  • Eskuero
    link
    fedilink
    4315 days ago

    “Google could be forced to sell Chrome” was the news in late november so I guess this a reaction to that.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      33
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      I want Chrome to be sold, honestly.

      I still don’t get why Linux Foundation helped Google out of that.

      • @grue
        link
        English
        2415 days ago

        I still don’t get why Linux Foundation helped Google out of that.

        I could be wrong, but I think that (at least to some extent) the Linux Foundation exists to be the more corporate-friendly face of Free Software Open Source, as a reaction against/in opposition to the hard-line “end-user freedom” stance taken by GNU/the FSF. If that’s accurate, it doesn’t surprise me that it would take a soft position regarding Google’s monopolistic practices. Especially since Google is a gold member of it.

        • z3rOR0ne
          link
          fedilink
          8
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          Aren’t a good portion of contributors to the Linux kernel also employees of the major FAANG companies?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          113 days ago

          they could easily have done this after the fact and avoided the current reality which Will be Google using Linux foundation funding to protect its monopoly of the ecosystem

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            13 days ago

            So instead of proactively working to make sure it’s not just Google contributing to Chromium (contributions that could go away if sold off), you think it would be better to just let the worst happen and then start doing something about it?

            Do you realize how much modern web relies on Chromium and how much of that is done by Google currently? It’s a terrible idea to have it the way it currently is and probably even worse if Chrome is sold.

            Also the idea of widening the contributor base helping the monopoly is sorta backwards.

      • Endymion_Mallorn
        link
        fedilink
        1115 days ago

        When it comes to a megacorp like Alphabet/Google, assuming foul play and bribery should always be the kneejerk.

        • @ilinamorato
          link
          714 days ago

          More likely, it’s calculated. The Linux Foundation probably did the math and realized that they could either participate in it, or watch Google run it themselves, packing the board with sycophants and leaving it with no real oversight.

          This way, there’s actually a trusted nonprofit voice in the room.

          • Endymion_Mallorn
            link
            fedilink
            414 days ago

            I hope you’re right. I just have the problem of thinking if you’ve got 9 megacorp supports and one nonprofit, you have 10 supporters for the largest megacorp.

            • @ilinamorato
              link
              313 days ago

              Maybe. Depends on what they do with it. But assuming they have any power on this board at all, it’ll be better that they’re there than if they weren’t. It’s not like Linux Foundation “keeping their hands clean” is going to help anything other than optics.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1015 days ago

      there’s a whole world of alternative, small, or minimalist non-Chromium non-Firefox browsers out there I would love to try out – but in today’s world, if it doesn’t support at least the full un-crippled version of uBlock Origin, it’s a complete non-starter

      (considering general trends, I’m just gonna have to sit down and setup PiHole aren’t I?)

      • @PushButton
        link
        414 days ago

        With Lynx, there’s even no need for plugins!

        In all honesty, you should try it. Configure it adequately, and really trying it.

        If people could respect the web standards and all have a text based version (aka working on Lynx), the web would be a better place for everyone - especially the impaired ones (blinds for example).

        I would trash all the JavaScript in the world to have a functional text based web any day.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        215 days ago

        I find the ad blocking in Gnome Web to be sufficient. The biggest thing that is holding it back in my opinion is a lack of features like extentions and FIDO support and moderate performance.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        213 days ago

        More accurately, It uses WebkitGTK, which is a fork of Webkit. Blink, the engine Chromium and Chromium based browsers use, is also a fork of Webkit.