Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmy.world

366 replies

lemmy.world

Please, Mozilla, explain in detail exactly in which way the internet is changing again, that requires you to return to Faschitter? Please help me make sense of this.

442
feddit.it

Cutting off Twitter means losing potential audience. It was an ideological stance when they did it, now nothing ideological is left at MozCorp.

73
Aulireply
lemmy.ca

Really what real people.are left on twitter?

17
Leonreply
pawb.social

Nazis, and people okay with sharing space with nazis.

40
AmyAyereply
nord.pub

Nazis and also Nazis. So not really people anyone should ever give a fuck about.

4

Nazis do not deserve to be catered to or courted as an audience.

4

I know, it's a facetious comment meant to put them on the spot for blaming some sort of "change in the internet (again)".

3

The fuck you doing Kurt Vinnegut, speaking from fake lemmy profiles. I know it as you, Kurt. Admit your Kilgore trout@ i know your the same person! It just is as it he. Poo te weet! As I say it now. Fuck is time weird. A quake coming. And that's God's slapstick; our dumbasses.

1

To me it seems like they're really pushing for mass-market appeal right now compared to just maintaining or slowly growing their existing more dedicated/niche base.

You can see it with them adding widgets, a free VPN, more visibly advertising trackers blocked (at least on Android, not sure about iOS), rebranding with a new mascot, and now going back to a platform that still has a ton of user lock-in keeping people there. They're trying to pull in regular people, I presume so they don't become as dependent on a base that has more strongly held convictions that Mozilla has to comply with to keep its users.

If it works out for them, it'll be good for their long-term funding and security, market appeal, etc, but bad for users that care a lot more about fundamental principles.

6
fizzlereply
quokk.au

There's potential users there, and ff isn't going to lose any users by rejoining.

4
fizzlereply
quokk.au

I just can't imagine anyone is going to change to chrome because ff started posting to x.

10
AmyAyereply
nord.pub

There are alternative forks.

1

Not really. The soft forks are more like pre-packaged configurations than separate browsers. If ff dies all the forks die.

I've used LibreWolf for years now but I still consider myself to be using firefox.

4
fizzlereply
quokk.au

Did you switch to a chrome fork?

3

These soft forks are more like pre-packaged configurations than another browser.

2
lemmy.world

Sadly plenty of ppl still use Twitter, plenty of companies and celebs still doing their thing there. Why do we have to single out Firefox? It's not a company that as ideals like most people here do. Yeah their new stuff is definitely shady, but it's that for Chromium. I'll still use Firefox, this doesn't bother me at all, cuz honestly who gives a fuck. I get the optics, but we do not live in a perfect world of morals and ideals. I only have limited energy I can dish out and this affects me 0% so I'll put that much into it. People are addicted to being angry all the time...

0

My comment isn't really about them returning to X. It's about them blaming it on some type of sudden change in the internet that's supposedly happening "again", that's forcing them to return. Just be honest and say it's for the reason you mentioned, that they want to reach as many as possible. 👍

2

I support Firefox doing whatever Firefox needs to do to keep doing what they do.....

I won't fucking touch it, but I need them to continue to exist so I can use forks of it like waterfox and librewolf

23

"we're here as and independent voice".

Yeah, sure. Tell Donald Trump, Elon Musk and Israel to fuck off, just to test your independence.

21
lemmy.ca

The only way to get ahead in today's world is to abandon all of your principles. What a shitty set-up.

150

reaching people where they are.

Aaaand that’s how we got Twitter.

There is no “reaching people.” Twitter is algorithmic. It only shows posts to people who’d find it engaging; in others words, you’re either posting into a black hole, preaching to the choir, or intentionally rage baiting.

The is no point in advocacy there. It gives the illusion of it, but it’s a lie.


Now, if they want to prepend every post with a link to Bluesky/Fediverse?

That’s great.

A siphon off the site is great. They’d probably get deprioritized for it, kinda like how posting Lemmy links seems to get one shadowbanned on Reddit. But participating in Twitter is otherwise just feeding the trolls.

24

Also reaching the people who most need to be reached.

6
Krauerkingreply
lemy.lol

I still remember this line someone said while complaining about how The Boys was toothless at actually pushing back against hero worship and capitalism.

You don't have to care, but vou really can't even if you want to.

14
terwn43lpreply
lemmy.world

i find it ironic how a lot of anti-capitalist shows are owned by Amazon and Apple

11

Let the people play out their fantasies of justice, equity, and revolution in a totally contained, purely virtual way.

13

Sell back the answer so people dont look for one themself.

4

Companies don't have morals, all they have is just profit. Why are you holding Firefox to some mythical standard? It's a company, it's only gotten shadier. Can't wait when other browsers hit the market in a couple years and Firefox will eventually die. Just a matter of time, they can't increase their market share for fuck all.

3

Fucking cowards. So many spineless losers who clutched their pearls after The Salute and pledged to leave. Too many other cowards stayed, so now they go back because “we can’t lose touch with all the cowards”.

119

It's just that classic corporate moral grandstanding in another flavor, like companies who are pro-Pride for June but forget queer people exist 11 months of the year, or worse, only have Pride acknowledgement during Democrat presidencies.

Virtually every (large) (for-profit) company's moral compass is: Get more money.

If fully endorsing Hitler would result in a 1% rise in profits, they'd do it.

36
lemmy.world

"We're here for the open internet"

- Mozilla on Nazi social platform

83
feddit.nl

Twitter is litterally the easiest platform to stay away from...

67

Yup, as someone who tried to use Twitter back in the day it's much harder to use it than to ignore it. Twitter is just shouting your virtue signaling and dog whistles into the void for worthless Kudos. I can do that without even using a computer.

6
discuss.online

So I guess Firefox holds respect in zero value. There's no excuse for returning to Twitter.

35
lemmy.zip

Now how does one refer to a tweet in the past tense? Does a tweet ever become a twat?

2
deftreply
lemmy.wtf

What if a cartel of cyber bridge trolls kidnap your grandma and the only way to view their riddles is reopening old social media? Is that a good excuse?

1

"We had a think and realized fascism is what we're all about, so we're back!"

177
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Firefox could do nothing but provide a standard working browser and be loved, but instead they go out of their way to be hated

36

They must have CEOs that think you always need to act, when sometimes inaction is the best action

7
lemmy.zip

Pretty sure they are referring to the ens—tification process.

-4
Jaxreply
sh.itjust.works

Why even bother using the word if you're going to self censor?

They even gave you a perfectly good alternative and you corrected it with a self censored word. Do you like how tight your leash feels?

8
lemmy.zip

I dunno. But at least I feel acknowledged by the time and effort you put into a response. I’m delighted you took that time for me.

-5
Jaxreply
sh.itjust.works

Seriously, examine the why's of the things you do. If you don't like cursing, don't curse. Use different words. Censoring on the behalf of corporate interests immediately makes you the enemy of anyone with half a brain.

3
lemmy.zip

I”ll choose my own words. If anyone read it, sounding it out in the reader’s inner voice would provide the intended understanding of what was being communicated. We ain’t writing code here. Ens—tification, enshitification. I understand it either way.

-3
Jaxreply
sh.itjust.works

I”ll choose my own words.

But you don't, clearly, because you'd rather opt for a word chosen for you by your corporate owners. In fact, you tried to correct someone choosing to use a different word than enshitification with your self censored version.

Some people hate being put in a cage, others cheer - you seem like the latter.

4

You’re really falling for this. I’m happy to be occupying so much of your mind that you feel compelled to respond to every retort. I’m pretty sure you could hide your own Easter eggs. Good luck with everything.

-3

Oh fuck off Mozilla. You really want to contribute to finance fucking nazis because "That's where people are"? What a world of spineless losers we have built.

68
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Fascism is when using twitter?

It might be disappointing, but not much more.

-90
piefed.social

Musk bought Twitter and renamed it X, and it now serves at the semi-official fascist-international forum.

In case you've lived under a giant rock since 2022...

123
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I just don't live in a echo chamber so closed that I would believe that any person using twitter is a fascist.

What would be next, anyone using firefox is a fascist?

You do understand where that way of thinking ends? You must understand it.

-70
OwOarchistreply
pawb.social

that I would believe that any person using twitter is a fascist.

Not every person on Twitter is a fascist.

But every person on Twitter supports fascists. Very literally. In a financial sense.

64
Omnipitaphreply
reddthat.com

Please elaborate on how having a twitter account financially supports fascism. I'd think the opposite if used by the majority of people. I'm genuinely asking, not trying to start a fight.

-2

The most simple, straightforward, and concise way is my least favorite word in the world: metrics. By using X, you increase the amount of activity on the platform, which the Muskrat takes to advertisers and investors and says "Look how many people use my platform, you should be paying me more money for access to the value they have as consumers/data to harvest."

This is actually why they made that ad-blocker that clicks on every single ad it blocks that I can never remember the name of. Because it financially hurts both the company serving the ads and the advertisers themselves as well by both messing with their data on you as a consumer (they can't add your interests to a group to sell to advertisers if you just click on everything) and by hurting their click-through to sales metric. Their click-through rate goes up, but because their purchase rate doesn't, it makes the metric go down and makes them less willing to spend as much on an advertising spot when they're less likely to get a return on that money.

There's also that whole thing where people go where there's a lot of people and by being part of the group that keeps people there, you're exposing them to right-wing propaganda and the various disinformation bot campaigns and whatnot, but that's a lot harder to explain/messier to get into.

10

Higher MAU = More companies buying advertisements = supporting twitter

7

Its about Musk having control of a major social platform. Just think about the implications an evil person can do i.e. mark Zuckerberg except richer

2
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I won't argue that.

That's the reason I don't do twitter and I restrain myself for many products.

But you know what they say "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism".

It's ok to boicot things to hurt them financially as far as you are able to. But let's not demonize anyone who doesn't carry the boicot as far as you can carry it, because that's counter productive.

-26
sh.itjust.works

“there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism”.

The VPS hosting of every Lemmy instance is thus unethical. Mastodon is then unethical. Buying a gun to defend yourself and your home is then unethical. Buying a child food is then unethical.

Hard disagree. The issues of life are not so cut and dry.

Fuck Twitter tho.

13

I meant that everything you buy in a capitalist world is putting money in hands of bad people.

You buy baby food from nestle and you are giving money to terrible people.

What I implied in the post, is that that doesn't make you a bad person. You need to live, and most importantly, you have right to enjoy your life. That would inevitably lead to giving money to bad people.

Here a corporation, Mozilla, is using a service from a bad person, twitter. Are they as bad because of it? I don't think so. There are other people, like Bernie Sanders, who still have an active twitter account. They are doing consumption that profits bad people, but in a capitalist economy that is inevitable. Thus I don't think the consumption of something should be the sole factor judging the ethics of a person.

We live in a society where is very hard or sometimes impossible to avoid it. Here, Mozilla or Bernie Sanders, haven't found another social network with enough userbase for their communication purposes. I personally don't agree with their choice, But I won't call them fash for making that choice. Because I know how limited consumption offers are in a capitalist world.

1
explodiclereply
sh.itjust.works

To be fair, there's plenty of things you can forego with no cost or negative cost. This isn't like having to buy food at a grocery store. So while you can't use the internet ethically, you can make ethical choices about which websites you visit.

10

That's why I don't go on twitter or reddit.

But I understand that different people have different needs. A company or a politician might need reach. They are not just someone having fun online. For them is their business.

I actually think is a bad choice, because they would have better public elsewhere. But a wrong decision like that would make them just wrong, not fascist.

0
athatetreply
lemmy.zip

Yeah but we don’t need to defend corps that support fascists either.

13

That's ok. I'm all for criticize mozilla for all the questionable shit they are doing lately. Either to achieve a change on them or to promote an alternative.

I'm just agaist calling fascist people that have not shown that they are indeed fascist.

Being fascist is something very very bad. For instance, to my view, violence against fascism is justified, that's why I really try to distinguish who is actually fascist, and who is just not actively fighting them.

-8
jlai.lu
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

You don't need to convince me of that.

I've been saying Musk is fash from way before be associated himself with Trump.

He is fascist because he believes in fascist ideology.

The way of thinking I talk about is thinking someone is fascist because they use a product or service provided by a fascist. Because the logical conclusions of that line of though are terrible.

-2
Iunnraisreply
piefed.social

There’s a saying… “If there are ten people sitting at a table eating dinner, and one of them is a nazi, you’ve got ten nazis.”

14

That logic leads to infinite nazi generation.

And to some incongruencies.

What happens if there's 10 person in the table, one is nazi and one is antifa. Are them all nazis? Are them all antifascist?

It doesn't seem like good logic to me.

-7

you are saying that X isnt a platform for fascist, yet its owned by one, which is it? and it has been owned by musk since 2022, you defintely need to get out from under the rock.

0
Swedneckreply
discuss.tchncs.de

at this point i can't take anyone who says "echo chamber" seriously any more, it's only used to defend shitheads

22
0x0reply

You do realize you're proving the exact point you're criticizing... right?

1
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

There are some instances that's evident that a person haven't have a serious talk with anyone thinking different than them in a long time. And that's just looping on feedback for the same line of though.

This is pretty clear when people make so broad assumptions of the type every X is Y.

In this case we are talking about people saying "everyone using twitter is fash". In my opinion that's very hard to justify unless you are deep in some echo chamber and you have just read that a thousand times and this it has got engraved in your thoughts. Because that's not a rational or logical though. It's pretty evident that there are tons of people who are on twitter and are not fascist. Just for giving an example Bernie Sanders has a twitter account and he posted there 10 hours ago. Is Bernie Sanders a fascist?

-3

Indeed, if that person went and said that IRL to regular people they’d be laughed at. But alas one of the biggest symptoms of echo chambers is not being able to recognize you’re in one.

Lemmy in particular is becoming more and more extremist as time goes and nobody seems to notice or care. Where people used to argue their opinions, they now just block/downvote and move on because that person must be evil/nazi/fascist/troll/a russian bot and their mind cannot be changed.

1
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Just a question.

If firefox is a fascist company for using the product of a fascist.

Is everyone using firefox a fascist for using the product of what you say is a fascist company?

-11
tetris11reply
feddit.uk

"You say hate peanuts, but by the transitive property of being a literal nutcase, you hate yourself? Curious." 🙄 (cmon..)

If the place you get your groceries starts giving handjobs to racists, despite what the staff and their customers want, would it be a place you still want to shop at

6

One thing is not liking/agreeing them. Other much different is calling them fascist.

I'm not a sith lord. Not all who is not with me is against me.

Maybe if I go, being antifascist, they also give me a handjob. Then what? Are they racist for giving handjob to racist, are they antifa for giving handjob to antifa?

-6
lemmy.world

You do understand where that way of thinking ends? You must understand it.

Do you understand where supporting the far-right and giving them free airtime ends?

11
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Arguing with people about this I found out Bernie Sanders has an active Twitter account. Is Bernie Sanders also fash? Is Bernie Sanders supporting Musk?

The problem with what I criticized is that by that logic everyone is far right, including you and me, because we both surely use or buy products that are owned by fash.

1
hachyderm.io

@daniskarma @BlindPenguin Musk is undeniably a fascist, and the platform actively amplifies right-wing extremism. However, X operates as an entrenched corporate monopoly over global communication; it is the de facto public square.

Maintaining a presence there is a tactical necessity for mass communication, not an ideological endorsement of its owner. Abandoning it simply surrenders the primary channel of discourse to fascists.

And the Fediverse remains an obscure niche. The vast majority of my country's populace has absolutely no awareness of Mastodon, much less the broader network.

4
0x0reply

Maintaining a presence there is a tactical necessity for mass communication,

Which Mozilla wouldn't really need if it wasn't being run for-profit by C-suits.

1
sh.itjust.works

The problem with what I criticized is that by that logic everyone is far right, including you and me, because we both surely use or buy products that are owned by fash.

And you don't see a problem with that?

0

Yes! That's why I have the políitical ideology I have. And why I try to boicot them as much as I can.

I'm here and not in reddit because I do want to change that.

3
lemmy.ml

It's nazi Facebook dude. Yes, using twitter is supporting fascism, quite literally

10
Rosereply
lemmy.zip

He enables it like all the others on it, yes, even if they oppose it in principle. That doesn't automatically make them fascists, but it makes them complicit.

6
Dr. Moosereply
lemmy.world

Literally owned by a billionaire who promotes fascism everywhere and has been caught manipulating the algorithms publicly. What other proofs could you possibly need?

8
daniskarmareply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

In order to call Mozilla a fascist company the proof I would need is a evidence of them believing and promoting the fascist ideology.

On another example Bernie Sanders used Twitter. I would also need extra proof that he is a fascist.

0
Dr. Moosereply
lemmy.world

no one's saying these are fascists but contributing to fascist network makes fascists stronger not weaker, no?

4

Quite some people here is actually saying they are. And that's the only thing I'm arguing. That they are not fascist.

Using any Musk service does make Musk stronger. That's real, I won't argue that.

1
lemmy.world

Really disappointing.

Hey we need money, so here we are back at the table of fascists, racists, transphobes and misogynists.

108
0x0reply

If Mozilla needs money they can start by firing whomever they hired to run it.

3
lemmy.dbzer0.com

What was the good reason to go back onto that right wing extremist pedophile platform?

41

This really requires the angry goose meme with the goose yelling: "Why did you take time off x?"

84
fedia.io

Mozilla doesn't really like it's users. It wants it's users to be Chrome users. I've said for too many years that they need to stop copying Google and forge their own path, that's how you change the browser market, not copying everyone else.

94

as social democrats have shown, copying your shithead competition is definitely 100% certainly undoubtedly THE only way to guarantee 100% that you recover all losses and continue to grow.

oh wait

34

I've said for too many years that they need to stop copying Google and forge their own path

They clearly don't want to. Everyone at Mozzila is happy to be Google's anti monopoly excuse and live in utter mediocrity. It's by design.

5

We desperately a full new browser. I just want to block ads,AI and tracking with a foss project.

Java blocking also.

8

I may be mistaken, but I thought Twitter still granted it to some people without paying? Or maybe they fully moved it to "check = subscription".

5
lemmy.world

Ridiculous.

Don't forget how quickly they shut down their Mastodon instance even though it cost them nothing.

53
infosec.pub

It cost them nothing? Isn't there some kind of hardware or software/IT/power cost for hosting?

11
carrylexreply
lemmy.world

I'm pretty sure self-hosting a single mastodon server where you're basically the only person on it likely costs less than 50$ per month...

That's a peanut for a million dollar company.

8

Firefox could probably create an account a Linux / open source focussed server or just the default mastodon server.

6

If you’re a company hosting anything you’re a target for hackers. You can’t just set up a server and call it a day. You have to take extra precautions that Joe Schmoe doesn’t have to worry about. And it’s a continuous effort, not one and done.

2

Oh no the million dollar company now has to maintain a server (likely 1-2h of dev/admin time per month) next to the hundreds of other servers that they already have...

4

I never understood why non-profits hire "leadership" from for-profit companies. You're just going to get a non-profit that acts like a for-profit.

29

That was most likely a Mozilla decision, not Firefox team, but yeah... dumb move (so on par with all their other moves).

24

We don't need to replace Firefox. We need to fork it away from Mozilla, in the stewardship of a better organization.

15

Mozilla is truly going for tech bro territory with an unhealthy dose of AI mixed with fascism.

62
titanicxreply
lemmy.zip

Firefox has been shitty for years. They just have good marketing.

11

Damn, it's refreshing to see the comments here. The reddit sub seems mostly unmoderated and now there are a bunch of Elon fanboys screaming words they don't understand.

13
piefed.social

It's one thing to have a hard time tearing yourself away from Twitter, quite another to knowingly go back.

Might as well just use Vivaldi at this point.

49
Rosereply
lemmy.zip

Vivaldi makes it easier for Google to maintain its monopoly and dictate how things are on the web. Google is way worse than Mozilla in every aspect. A Firefox fork is the way.

54

You're right.

Plus, after trying it for an hour, I can't get used to Vivaldi's gross font rendering.

9
cabbagereply
piefed.social

My unwillingness to use Chromium borders on the extreme, but this is the final straw for me. Vivaldi seems more aligned with my values than any other major player at this point, and the Firefox forks don't sit quite right with me.

I can't wait for Servo to be ready.

-10
Zidanereply
lemmy.ca

What is wrong with ff forks?

13

In general it seems to me Firefox codebase is too big for any of the current forks to really be independent alternatives. It's all just my opinion and personal experience though. Librewolf has different priorities to me to the point where I found that usability suffered, whereas Waterfox' inclusion of Brave's adnlock engine is highly unwelcome in my book - I want nothing to do with brave. Zen Browser seemed messy to me, though I can see how it's great for others.

It seems to me Chromium, WebKit and Servo are better at separating the engine from the browser, making it possible for smaller actors to make their own browsers without forking the engine. A Firefox fork seems to me to just become a very big thing very fast, and one that requires a large dedicated team to be done right. I know other people enjoy the forks, they just never feel quite right to me.

In short, if Mozilla has turned evil and does shitty things to Gecko as a result, I don't trust that the current forks of Firefox can really provide a real alternative as they depend on upstream development of Firefox.

2
shirashoreply
feddit.online

I built servo from source about a week ago and tried visiting some websites. They have a ways to go...is putting it nicely. Still, there are many commits every day, so hopefully it is just a matter of time.

2

Why did you build it from source? They frequently update it with servo shell here, and I got it running well on both Android and desktop Linux.

Enabling experimental features is important. While it's still not ready it is already much better than when I first tried it a few months ago. :)

1
lemmy.world

Elon has had every chance and advantage. He has had tremendous success. And yet he chooses to be a villain. I'm not interested in using anything he touches.

11
lemmy.today

covid broke his mind, moved over to texas once california demanded more safetry protocols, and taxes. bought X, originally tried to hype his own stocks, but he was forced to buy it. since nobody supported him he decided to go full nazi and support republicans instead, which resulted in him rigging the election.

7

Covid just made him show his true colors. The Thai cave rescue saga where he called that guy a pedo for rescuing the children without his help was 2018. There are emails between him and Epstein about visiting the island for a party from 2012 and 2013. 2016 he was announced as an advisor to Trump #1.

He's actively been exactly who he is for decades. The EVs and SpaceX are about his savior complex. HE needs to save the world. If it's not him, then it's going to be no one.

5

Trump quit Twitter and it didn't decrease his exposure there. There were plenty of people sharing screenshots of his posts. But the fact he wasn't on there sent a message. Firefox should do the same thing. If they are respected enough their message will get spread indirectly, and the fact that it's indirect sends its own message.

21

No need to call names. Height challenged special people are people as well

-2
lemmy.world

Most users don't care about politics and won't follow your boycott. The and result is mozilla crawling back to their user base, not the other way around

15
lemmy.world

I stuck to Firefox all this time, but now I am thinking of finally jumping to a fork of it.

16
Zeh_oniamreply
lemmy.eco.br

Librewolf works just the same, so there's that.

If you're feeling fancy, you can try others, but the dog is the simplest one to start with.

12

Sad to say, none directly attached to that project.

I just use firefox for android in all honesty. I'm already on android anyways, I already sold my soul so hard in that matter that anything else I do on it is just a small cherry on top of the shit cake.

4
0x0reply

Not Librewolf.
Ironfox and Fennec do.

2

Just FYI there’s currently no built-in auto-update for LibreWolf on MacOS. So you’ll probably want to follow the repo or something

2

Waterfox for the most minimal touch, it's just FF with no Moz Corp in it and no other changes.

Librewolf for very hardened privacy defaults, even the sort of setting that sacrifices ease of use or compatibility in favor of privacy.

uBO works on any FF fork, i believe it's included by default in Librewolf. Waterfox has a native adblocker but it disables itself if you use uBO.

7

I use LibreWolf on desktop and IronFox on mobile (android, grapheneOS), and I've got 0 complaints.

5

Zen seems alright.

I use both though. I can just turn off whatever I don’t like in FF, and security-wise, mainline FF feels a bit safer to me.

4
lemmy.world

People complain, and I agree it sucks, but what other options are there? Google sucks worse and chromium is automatically ruled out. All the firefox forks still run gecko and are basically just a reskinned version with all the same issues. And new engines like ladybird are still VWIP. I get that it sucks but firefox is the best out there for now.

17

I'm personally sticking with Gecko while holding out hope for Servo to pickup where Gecko left off.

6

I tried Servo earlier and it sort of works. Incorrect styling on even simple web HTML + CSS web pages. There's Kagi's Orion, but it's closed source, so arguably worse than everything else. I may check out Gemini and the Smolweb/Gemini protocol next, lol.

1
pyrereply
lemmy.world

i wonder if "go fuck yourselves" is high on the list.

1

I hope not. It should be "go fuck yourselves for going back to Nazi twitter", so they don't get confused as to where the anger is coming from.

3

Unsure why people are so pissy.

If you want hearts and minds for a cause, do you go to the people who already agree or do you go to where the others are?

How do you expect them to spread the word of their product(s) if they are not where the "normies" are?

5
lemmy.world

Can you imagine getting paid, from any company, to post on social media? It breaks my brain that such a position exists.

8
tremreply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

Well, that position usually has a bunch of other responsibilities, too. But Firefox also doesn't have a natural monopoly like other browsers, so telling potential users that Firefox exists is kind of a crucial part of that whole endeavour. Don't need to build a browser, if no one uses it...

4

It just strikes me as the same level of usefulness as someone that has the job title "developer advocate."

0
fedinsfw.app

Thanks. I'm a huge Firefox fanboi, but now filled with rage and uncertain what to do. Maybe it's time to quit the WWW....

2

I don't know if they really get more reach out there than in open platforms.

I certainly would never make a Twitter account for following them there.

If they don't post anywhere else I just won't hear them.

14
egretsreply
lemmy.world

Who's going to maintain an independent fork? It's a crazy amount of work.

22

mozilla was suppose to do that, they got lazy and had "failure to launch" when google started funding them with ad dollars.

0
Lumisalreply
lemmy.world

It is, but if it can be done for the Linux Kernel, an organization running it should be possible.

Then again Servo is starting to finally get there too.

But either way, Firefox is nothing but captured opposition at this point.

0

Linux works out because it has a raging man running the show as a benevolent dictator. There is the Linux Foundation, but their members are at the mercy of Torvalds mood whenever they try to push a feature into the Kernel. Mozilla is more conventional in that department. If some lead dev doesn't like it, they can take their papers and leave. You can't always count on either solution to work out positively.

4

So? Is it that hard to believe that a company that's working in today's environment is using one of the most effective platforms out there even if it's run by a white supremacist?

News at 11, most people suck and don't have the stomach to not use something popular even if they're run by a horrible human being.

2
lemmy.world

Why does anyone care? Never in my life will I be like "Oh, fuck, Cuisinart made a new social media account!"

2
Abyssianreply
lemmy.world

So the point is Twitter is bad? But only people who still use it would even notice this. So they think they're patrolling the bad place to make sure no one else uses it?

Virtue signaling sounds about right.

2

Weak. Time to bail since I I suspect things will only get worse from here.

2
lemmy.world

Yet another reason firefox is now relegated to being my second browser (a spot previously ocupied by edge)

3
Zidanereply
lemmy.ca

First being? Genuinely curious if there is a good option I'm willing to give it a try

6

I’ve started to use Zen. It’s a firefox base. But has some features i really like

4
lemmy.world

I've started using libre-wolf, I know its firefox dependant but at least if it breaks its because they didn't sell out. Also doesn't shove AI in my face every few days.

2
lemmy.blahaj.zone

I do feel somewhat bivalent about it, but at the end of the day, they are an activist group at heart. You do need to enter the nazi bar to do activism. Also, I do want Firefox to have more users, so I can continue to use it. Advertising for Firefox on the fedi isn't terribly useful, since most people use it or a fork anyways, or have a strong reason why they don't.

Like, I'm glad that they did previously leave X, to indicate that the Elmo place is problematic. That's also activism. But I do also think, they should be visible there. And I do not think that many people would decide to not leave X, due to that being where they get their Firefox news from or whatever.

-2
Deebsterreply
infosec.pub

bivalent /bī-vā'lənt or biv'ə-lənt/
adjective

  1. Having a valency of two (chem)
  2. Relating to one of a pair of homologous chromosomes (also noun)

Well, turns out it is a word! Not the one you wanted though, which is "ambivalent".

6

I would return to X, but they banned me for stating I was attracted to minors...despite being an FBI designated account for determining potential offenders, on a t2 level, which everyone who understood that cough my life partner made means, obviously.

-6

Six retards downvoted a cop, guys, based purely on stimulus response. Not one of them thought there was a reason I said this to determine why I said it. Instant downvotes. Children downvoted me for protecting them. Yea, it is a thankless job. Good thing I'm a better human being than all of you. I grew up!

0

I can see some logic in this. Since X is the most populated service of its kind, it's more democratic, meeting people where they already are. Around the end of last year I updated to a crash-prone build of Nightly and while I was able to eventually find a bugzilla ticket describing and reporting the crash, checking places like r/Firefox and searchable Nitter instances (I haven't had a Twitter account in a decade and therefore can't view most posts unless I log in) was my first response in diagnosing whether it was an issue only on my end or not.

Anyway, Mozilla lost me a long time ago as a believer of their institution. They just happen to benefit from Firefox being the most well-supported FOSS browser.

-3

Of all the nonsense to get angry about the Twitter usage is the dumbest. Pure virtue signaling from people who do not use Twitter.

-1
thelemmy.club

I feel like differences of opinion on any platform is good. I don't like echo chambers.

-5

We don't platform nazis and child sexual abuse image generation by adding engagement to twitter. Your comment ignores a lot of settled reality here.

There is a difference between a civil difference of opinion and what that place is. Either you know that and you ignore it or you're tuned out to the point that you're just not a serious person in this discussion

10
lemmy.world

I eventually needed another reddit account. I still have a facebook one. I don't want to but I've a bunch of people who will not use another platform.

-3

You'll talk to people who will only use this guy's website?

There's a whole internet including email, bro. You don't need the nazi bar.

11

there is no twitter anymore. x shouldnt be called it especially since its even more vile than twitter ever was.

-4
lemmy.world

Year-on-year I see Firefox fans akin to Chrome fans. The only ones left at this point are either afflicted with tribalism or apathy. Considering how many wear their browser choice as a flex, pretty sure it's mostly the former.

-7
Aulireply

I use it to try and avoid chromium monopoly.

5
lemmy.nz

This is such a non issue. It sucks that the platform is used but its where users are at so it makes sense for ff to be there. Its just unfortunate that they dont continue posting on mastodon.

-15
Rothereply
piefed.social

Definitely not a non-issue to continue supporting an openly fascist social media. And especially declaring with proudness that they have returned.

35
Fizzreply
lemmy.nz

They got 2.4m views on a single post. Firefox needs to reach users and this is a successful and free method of doing so.

I sure hope your hands are clean from similar support I'd hate for stones to be getting thrown in glass houses.

-16
athatetreply
lemmy.zip

Corps don’t need you defending them for supporting fascists.

15
Fizzreply
lemmy.nz

Firefox is not supporting facists.

-4
athatetreply
lemmy.zip

Twitter is owned by a Nazi. If you use Twitter you are supporting fascism.

6
Fizzreply
lemmy.nz

Do you support fascism?

-2
katy ✨reply
piefed.blahaj.zone

views on engagement bait don't really mean anything, especially on a site like twitter.

13

Any post with the firefox logo and brand does something to the people who view it

-3

Even being generous and saying 50% its still good reach for Firefox.

-2
lemmy.world

It needs to be said...

Not all users are created equal, and users who are STILL in 2026 happily ignoring what's happening at X may be a source of money, but they also continue to show on a daily basis an appalling lack of judgement and principle which, if sought, will eventually bleed into the decision-making of the direction of the product. This is not "creating a bigger tent", this is "inviting in people who are going to change the very nature of the inside of the tent". It's not an overreaction OR unreasonable for users who choose to use Firefox SPECIFICALLY for its potential to provide an unenshittified alternative to Google's trash to see Firefox desperately trying to attract people cheering for the trash and decide they want out.

In the BEST case scenario, they fail to attract the new users and this is an embarrassing culdesac, but they've STILL significantly damaged their credibility with core users who know what this tactic is. And in the WORST, they GET a massive number of new users from the large numbers on X, and now the core Firefox users no longer have a say in the direction of the product - they've become a minority.

18

Its a post on social media its not going to change the project. Mozilla will still be staffed by mozilla staff and X users are not going to find their way into the discussion forms and change the culture. Firefox is competing against google, edge and safari its not supposed to be a hyper niche snowflake browser. Its supposed to be a browser for every normie internet user because everyone deserves a browser than isnt spyware. To do that it needs to be where normies are. If this is moving the needle for people im shocked they havent abandoned firefox a long time ago.

-6

i mean users of firefox aren't really on twitter; very few people are actually on twitter. it's a niche social media platform made bigger because the dc pundit class circlejerks on it to pat themselves on the back.

6
vogireply
piefed.social

In the context of mainstream social media, X is relatively small. The bigger problem is that most people on there are Nazis and are not interested in building an open web. Mastodon has only 1 Million MAU but gives a comparable reach if you compare the same posts made by FirefoxWebDevs on the latest Release:

X: https://xcancel.com/FirefoxWebDevs/status/2079542497466835112 (3 Comments, 9 Reposts, 98 Likes)

Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@firefoxwebdevs/116957940443303728 (4 Comments, 11 Reposts, 32 Likes)

We Are Social, DataReportal, Meltwater. (2025). Most popular social networks worldwide as of October 2025, by number of monthly active users (in millions). Statista. Statista Inc.. Accessed: July 22, 2026. https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/

4
Fizzreply
lemmy.nz

Ok so if it gives comparable reach can you point to the post that compares to the one being highlighted? I'm not aware of any Firefox mastodon post getting near a million views let alone two and a half.

1
vogireply
piefed.social

No I cannot, they did not post the same post on Mastodon and have just recreated that account on there. Even if they did Mastodon does not track views.

Fact is if you leave out the drama which is obviously being heavily pushed by the algo and take a regular post informing about latest changes and news which is arguably the goal of an social media account of an organisation they are comparable even with 20x the following on X (referring to firefoxwebdevs as its on both platforms well established).

1

No even ignoring this post the ones on X still get 100k impressions. I wish it werent the case but it is. X has 500x the active users of Mastodon it will always outpreform. I dont think that means Firefox had to leave Mastodon but alas they need to promote their product first and foremost and they can do activism second and take the moral highroad third. If the product fails it all fails and we all end up on google chrome.

1
Firefox capitulates and returns to Twitter | Spyke