this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
57 points (61.4% liked)

Firefox

18056 readers
156 users here now

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

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 75 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Fuck noted racist Bryan Lunduke.

[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 40 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm so out of the loop here. Never heard of him before. A quick web search yielded little. But his seemingly-abandoned Twitter profile is...something. https://nitter.net/bryanlunduke

I used to say controversial things that I don't really believe to try and get attention. Now I've changed. Black Lives Matter. He / Him

🀷

What's his deal?

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh he's very active: conservativenerds.locals.com

He was one of the founding members of Jupiter Broadcasting. Was heavily involved in openSUSE for a long time (maybe even on the board?) and did a lot of Linux journalism. If you've ever seen the annual tongue in cheek "Linux sucks" video, that is him.

It's a huge shame. He's very charismatic and likeable otherwise, I just wish he also wasn't carrying around awful opinions about so many other people.

Yup, I used to like watching his stuff, but he's kind of become controversial, so screw that.

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago

Good catch.

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 47 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What an shitty article. It is looking on the revenue, ceo income and market share of only 2 years and trys to make a point.

[–] angrymouse@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

It's this fucking lunduke again, he is a right-wing that tries to call Mozilla for whatever reason from time to time.

[–] Decade4116@awful.systems 16 points 1 year ago

Lunduke is such a contrarian. He cannot help himself from trying to argue that he understands better than common opinion, whether or not his position makes sense.

This is the man who disabled HTTPS on his site because he felt that the fact certificates can expire and domains can change hands made it not secure enough... and that using plain HTTP was somehow a more pragmatic security approach.

[–] ulkesh@beehaw.org 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I stopped at Lunduke. No thanks.

[–] 0xtero@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

I think I recognize the name from distant past, but not up to date. He's problematic?

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago)
[–] neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What methods are being used to measure browser market share? Are those methods inclusive of Firefox users utilizing privacy-forward tools and ad blockers? If not, then Firefox market share may not necessarily be dwindling.

Then again, if Mozilla's revenue stream is aligned with the world of advertising, Firefox users who strive to make themselves invisible to advertisers are being written-off outright by Mozilla. The population of browser market share is only counting those who advertisers can influence - nobody else matters.

[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'm not an expert, but I was curious so I did 15 minutes of digging and this is what I found. Take it in context.

Wikipedia's Usage share of web browsers page references two sources for stats: StatCounter and NetMarketShare.

StatCounter is an analytics tool for web site operators. They cover their methodology here: https://gs.statcounter.com/faq#methodology . To quote:

Our tracking code is installed on more than 1.5 million sites globally.

Their installation guide explains that they use a small JavaScript snippet embedded into the site's HTML.

Firefox blocks this if enhanced tracking protection is set to strict. Discussion on Hacker News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34502986 . Some commenters there also said that uBlock origin blocks it. I have not confirmed.

NetMarketShare also refers to collecting data from user browsers and requiring JavaScript. https://netmarketshare.com/methodology

I would be interested to see server-side statistics based on HTTP user-agent from major global sites like Wikipedia, but I was not able to find that. I imagine spoofing user-agents is less common than ad blocking and tracker blocking

Edit: Found Wikimedia's browser stats:

https://analytics.wikimedia.org/dashboards/browsers/#all-sites-by-browser/browser-family-and-major-hierarchical-view

Linked from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Statistics#Analytics

[–] Nighed@sffa.community 6 points 1 year ago

I see suggestions to spoof that too for sites that require chrome for example

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We, the community, really need to make a separate browser project. It's clear that Mozilla doesn't care about competing with chrome/chromium. They just want to be in the market to get that sweet google money so that google can't be sued for being a monopoly by funding a "competitor".

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They spun off the Servo browser project if you want to work on that.

That said browsers are as complex as kernels now a days, it's crazy how much work is involved in it.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 4 points 1 year ago

If I were a programmer, maybe. They got my financial support on The Linux Foundation. Feel free to donate :)

[–] 0xtero@beehaw.org 17 points 1 year ago

Well this is, shall we say, not surprising, but nevertheless disappointing.

[–] PanArab@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

Firefox slides into irrelevance either. I didn’t realize it has less than 4% market share. I remember when it had around 20% not too long ago

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think Mozilla the company needs to be rethought

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, that's been the case for like 10 years now.

The focus should be on securing independent funding. This means paid services or increased independent donations. Some ideas:

  • Mozilla VPN - essentially a wrapper over Mullvad, but the landing page doesn't give a good reason to choose it over Mullvad (e.g. container tabs); choosing a server per site should be front and center
  • email - I know they tried at some point, but they really should integrate with something like ProtonMail (e.g. FF-specific TLD with service through ProtonMail)
  • password manager - they have their own solution, but it's FF-only; perhaps have a cobranded Bitwarden that integrates with other Mozilla products cleanly
  • ad blocker - Mozilla should work with major websites to drop ads and let the user choose between privacy-respecting ads (served by Mozilla based on local browsing history) or anonymous payment (Mozilla would host something like GNU Taler, which you'd load through a method of your choosing)

The last I think could be truly disruptive.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly Mozilla could be a hugely profitable company. There is clearly a market for privacy and freedom tech.

Yup, and they have both a for profit and nonprofit part of the org, so it's totally doable. They just need competent leadership who legitimately care about being independent of search money.