this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
489 points (100.0% liked)

196

17934 readers
538 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 102 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Chrome doesn't "leak" your data to Google, it intentionally sends it directly to them. That's like saying my toilet "leaks" human waste into the sewage system.

[–] Cosmonaut_Collin@lemmy.world 37 points 2 years ago

That sounds accurate though from a fluid standpoint.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Under communism there are no leaks, there are only drains as a leak is a superfluous drain brought on by bourgeois decadence, indeed, by dress coats with neither knee nor elbow patches, unwilling and unable to apply duct tape.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 2 years ago (2 children)

But privacy and data security are political

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 2 years ago

Yes, but it's not up for debate, period. Fuck chrome.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I would think the argument would be that you choosing the superior product is not a political decision, other than the viewpoint that everything is politics.

[–] CriticalMiss@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)
[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

He’d just say: get whatever is better. Firefox is a better deal, you don’t give data and get a browser

Yeah it's not like he was some unhinged LinkedIn type that thinks you exist to generate profits.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

He'd probably just say something about absolute advantage 🤷

[–] nobloat@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yea but I wish Firefox didn't survive completely on money from Google

[–] huginn@feddit.it 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Do you donate money to them monthly?

[–] nobloat@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If I could, I would. Sadly being from North Africa makes it hard for me to donate to my favorite FOSS projects. There are many restrictions and even getting a credit card that's usable internationally is a pain, and it only gives you an amount each year you can use online. Not to mention having a really low currency and bad economy would make even a trivial donation feel like a sizable portion of your income. My comment wasn't a dig at Firefox but a lament. It shows how complex things are. The FOSS and privacy oriented option has to rely here on Google having enough money to give to it. Google having enough money relies on data mining. So the monetization of privacy-respecting option relies on other users letting go of their privacy to Google. While Firefox is a superior option, it is worth seeing how ultimately we are still fucked. Even the FOSS option survives through ad revenue of another company. This highlights the problem of FOSS monetization that needs to be solved. Firefox should learn from Thunderbird.

[–] cows_are_underrated@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago

That's actually a very good point. There aren't that much big FOSS projects that can survive just from donations.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago

There's some gripes around that, actually, as donations don't flow to Firefox but to the other stuff the foundation does with the profits they earn from Firefox. In fact Firefox development is done by the corporation, not the foundation, so they can't even send money there (at least I assume you can't funnel money from non-profit to for-profit corporations in the US, that would be nonsensical even for their legal system). It might fund Firefox indirectly, though, e.g. awarding funds for a FLOSS SSL library which Firefox then uses but stuff like funding a UI framework or such probably won't fly because it's not web.

It's not that the stuff they fund is bad, it just ain't Firefox. Also they have quite some administrative overhead (30%). About 1% of what they spend on that stuff comes from donations, the rest is income from, primarily, Firefox, primarily by selling the default search engine spot -- different ones depending on market.

Wie need a Marx and Adam conover Fusion ai cannon event 196 do your Thing <3