Not a good look for Firefox. Third partners and device fingerprinting clearly mentioned in the documents.
The move is the latest development in a series of shifts Mozilla has undergone over the past year.
The gecko engine and Firefox forks, such as Tor, Mullvad, Librewolf, and Arkenfox, are stables of private, open source web browsing.
In fact, Mozilla’s is one of the few browser engines out there, in a protocol-heavy industry that many say only corporate or well-funded non-profits can reliably develop.
What is more, daily driving the more hardened-for-privacy Firefox derivatives can be frowned upon by many sites, including your bank and workplace.
Mozilla’s enshittification leaves the open source community without a good alternative to Firefox, after years of promoting it as a privacy-friendly alternative to spyware-cum-browser Chrome.
People are saying it is Bad News
So, uhh, you want to tell us who is saying it’s bad news?
gestures vaguely in a direction
Ehh, people, you know?
I have the feeling people are overreacting to anything Mozilla does these days, just to have an excuse to talk people into using (politically?) worse browsers.
If Mozilla wants to limit their use of my input, why the do I need to give them a full, non-exclusive license?
On the contrary, I think this is a responsible way to operate. The terms of use apply to the Mozilla distributed binary, not the open source version and open source forks, and I don’t think additional terms shut them out of that. The privacy policy is clear, concise as can be and links so that people can jump directly to what is being collected.
I’m looking into Ladybird browser that everyone here is talking about and I can’t find anything about when they will release something.
Keep an eye on it, but it’s not ready yet.
Have you considered what is driving this change?
Looking from the sidelines, I think it’s all about money, specifically, how to make the development of Firefox sustainable. Yes, I’m aware of the cynical view that this is about lining the pockets of the CEO, I have no evidence for this.
I think that’s essentially caused by how we have licensed open source software and had limited resources to combat abuse at the industrial scale that silicon valley companies have monetized other people’s work.
Bruce Perens is attempting to erect “Post Open”, but I’m not yet sure if that is going to solve the fundamental issues.
Disclaimer: I’ve worked a little on the community standards document for the post open project.
Being halfway between both sides, I can see the need for a monetary model to sustain development, yet I am challenged by the opacity that this feels like. The OP’s point that it feels like a downward slide toward principles compromise is challenging. Especially in light of the enshittification of everything lately, Mozilla needs to do a better job communicating how this is not going down that path and yet also trying to sustain itself.
Centrism is apathy and sucks
Reductionism is lazy and sucks. You didn’t even read the comment you responded to, you’re just mad that not everyone is upset enough for you.
No, not particularly. I’m not that upset myself, I recently switched to Librewolf. I just get annoyed at what I perceive as statements that ride the fence. Privacy is not a place to give ground on.
Did it ever occur to you that people can have a mix of views that don’t fully conform to one ideology or another? It’s a spectrum, not riding the fence. Like politics, not everything is a team sport.
That’s an idiotic statement. Realism or understanding what realpolitik is in a political situation is far more likely to allow you find and develop change in an organization, as well keep you from wasting your time on useless leverage points. In this case knowing both frames of reference is valuable so that action can be taken, as opposed to just writing five words.
Privacy and defending it is a worthy thing to have an ideological stance on.
Time for Ladybird to release their first alpha?
deleted by creator
The choice of C++ + Swift feels strange and off-putting to me. Swift, at least, is pretty safe as languages go, but does leave me scratching my head a bit. C++, though, frankly should have no place in a new browser project. For a piece of software whose whole purpose is to essentially download and run untrusted code, C++ is unacceptable.
It’s realistically not gonna happen, but what I’d really like to see is Servo developed into a full browser.
deleted by creator
Yeah, I know the history. And if they fully switch to Swift and manage decent performance, that would be acceptable, just strange. And it would also be fine to use whatever language if it were only a hobby project. I just reject the notion that C++ is an acceptable choice for new projects in security-critical positions.
deleted by creator
Yeah, it was ok when the project started. The issue begins once it transitions from a toy to a potential competitor with Firefox.
deleted by creator
And as I said, if they manage to entirely switch, I won’t have reservations.
As far as security in extant browsers and C++, see here: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safety/
The Chromium project finds that around 70% of our serious security bugs are memory safety problems.
It’s a serious issue.
Correct me if I’m wrong but ladybird is focused on a new browser, and not a new browser that is privacy oriented? Their language is pretty specific about donations and independence, but I didn’t catch anything that specifically denotes privacy.
deleted by creator
Looks like Mozilla has decided they can no longer ignore the money they can gain from having more and more data to sell.
Joining Google on the ad/data sales Evil Side.
🤷♂️ 🤷♂️ 🖕
Will be very sad if they continue down this slippery slope. I guess my last donation will stay just that 🫠
