That’s the kind of thing that sounds nice, but in practice I don’t think that’s what evidence points towards.

That is true, but all that wouldn’t be able to survive if Mozilla were to significantly scale back development.

I’m not sure which button you’re talking about, but if it’s the one in the sidebar, click “Customise sidebar”, and then uncheck “AI chatbot”.

By now you would’ve expected someone to have pointed out what code is actually collecting that data that’s supposedly sold.

I don’t see how being a non-profit suddenly makes it cheaper to build a secure, modern and compatible browser. (Although I know lots of people underestimate how much effort that takes. But just consider that already Mozilla’s doing it for far less money than Google invests in Chrome, for example.)

I fail to understand how they haven’t figured out a way out of this seems to me they’re using all the money they from Google as if there is no tomorrow… Why on earth also if Firefox is so clearly their main product does it seem to not always be at the centre of their attention?

The answer to the second question is the answer to the first - there have been a ton of attempts at alternative sources of funding, but it’s hard to come close to the ~half a billion USD the default search deal provides. So far the branded services you’re calling for don’t seem to have been able to pull it off, and I haven’t seen any signs that donations would be able to either.

(Although as for email with Thunderbird…)

I think you’re grossly overestimating the share of volunteer contributions if you think it might even be over half. It’s amazing what contributors do, but the vast majority, and especially thankless-but-important work like web compatibility or security, is done by paid staff.

They’re saying they want something like Synaptic (mostly for its “multi-select”, apparently, though I’m not sure what that means?), but have it support AppImages, Flatpaks, Snaps, etc., instead of just Debs like Synaptic does.

Can I just say: hats off to the bug archaeology you’ve done there :)

Heh yes, but for the purposes of this post I wanted to focus on why it wasn’t just another distro recommendation, but one tailored specific to their use case :) (I don’t even use Kinoite myself, so it’s extra genuine.)

If you do a reinstall, I’d recommend going with a Kinoite install. It’s like regular Fedora KDE, except that it avoids this risk of traces of past experiments everywhere.

thelibre.news is woefully underappreciated.

Huh? The article says:

it is generated locally, on your device

Did I misread something?

(Agreed that this should be the norm and not luck.)

Except without the shitty parts where it keeps a log of everything you do and sends it off your device, luckily.

Ha, well, if my single-digit-downloads (all by me) NPM module is influential enough to set precedent, then I’d consider that a success.

Yeah I get that point, and so my point is that if the use case is important enough that they’d be able to justify allocating that personnel, I use the AGPL to give them that nudge. When it’s just some non-critical component, then I’ll just slap an MIT on it and be done with it.

My rule-of-thumb is: is the licence going to make things better for users? In other words, I try to predict whether a company would just not use my AGPL-licensed code, or would potentially contribute back. If they wouldn’t, I don’t really care and rather my code at least gets used to build something presumably useful.

No worries! Thanks for updating your comment :)

If you think you know what happened or the context, you probably don’t. Please don’t make assumptions. Thank you.

https://vt.social/@lina/114184253273866198