Almost all the links in my front homepage are sponsored now. What’s next, a few ads in the bookmark bar? How about when I enter a URL, I then have to type “McDonald’s” before I can actually navigate there?

      • adarza@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Mozilla already has Scrooge McDuck amounts of money

        no. they don’t.

        the google money that they rely too heavily on, may not always be there. they need more diverse funding. these paid placements, which can be turned off, are one way to do that.

        turn off and delete the sponsored stuff at install, never see 'em again. it’s not like they’re microsoft or something, constantly turning that kind of shit back on with every-other-update.

      • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        While this analysis is somewhat convincing, let’s not forget that for now Firefox is all we have. Important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

        In my ideal scenario, Mozilla becomes like the Wikimedia Foundation. Which has somehow also accumulated “Scrooge McDuck amounts” of cash but seems to be on a firmer footing and better managed.

          • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Okay but you mean which is harder?? Both projects rely on a bunch of salaried professionals supervising an army of volunteers. Firefox is a web browser, i.e. notoriously the space shuttle of software. But the Wikipedia is doing some surprisingly innovative and cutting-edge stuff with its own codebase too, as I understand it. Whichever is costlier, I’m not sure we’re talking about an order of magnitude of difference.

            • verdigris@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 hours ago

              I’m not an expert on either codebase but I believe the main driver of complexity with developing a browser engine is the sheer number of standards and how fast they change and multiply. Wikipedia has to update articles and maintain the server backend, which is no small task with such a global and comprehensive website, but Firefox has to do similar things on top of vastly more complex code with much more churn. There’s a reason Mozilla developed Rust as well.

      • davel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        https://www.jwz.org/blog/2024/06/mozilla-is-an-advertising-company-now/#comment-249969

        Preemptive subtwit.

        Let’s say you run a nonprofit animal shelter. And for some reason, some people feel you should be seeing hockey-stick growth, but the donations aren’t covering it.

        So you decide to start up a side-line of selling kittens for meat.

        Then you will inevitably have someone stroking their chin and saying, 'Yes, yes, but how could they afford to stay open if they weren’t selling kitten deli slices?"

        Some might say – maybe you aren’t an animal shelter any more. Some might say.

        • o_d [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 hours ago

          It’s a real shame what’s happened to Mozilla. Maybe Trump will add browser software to the list of sanctions on China and we’ll end up with a Deepfox in a year or two.