And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.

  • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    122
    ·
    1 year ago

    It doesn’t matter and it’s irrelevant here. I just despise Mozilla and their false morality. Use whatever you want.

    • antisoma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not irrelevant since you stated Firefox is less good than what you are using now. Of course people are interested in a feasible alternative. So, since you introduced it, what are you using instead?

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        67
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I said that I feel it’s less good. I’m not going to tell people what they should use and I surely won’t tell them to use the same browser I use. People should simply use whatever they prefer/suits them best.

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        56
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I didn’t know I was so evil that I’m doing the world a worse place just because I prefer a different browser. And I’m ideologically far form alt-right, btw.

        OTOH, talking about corporate greed:

        • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          51
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          that is a funny graph. Even assuming the data is true, it deliberately missrepresents market share as usage. Which pretty much neglects the fact hat maybe a person or two and a device with a browser or two have entered the market since then.

          Also it does not have any information on source of the data, methodology, definition of the terms etc. So it is pretty much worthless as an argument.

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            41
            ·
            1 year ago

            that is a funny graph. Even assuming the data is true, it deliberately missrepresents market share as usage. Which pretty much neglects the fact hat maybe a person or two and a device with a browser or two have entered the market since then.

            Fine, so on the same basis we can also reject the “chromium dominance” argument, which is the main selling point of Mozilla.

    • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just despise Mozilla and their false morality.

      What about Brave CEO’s inhuman immorality towards transgender people, since you do use Brave? You want to try being ethical?

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        “inhuman immorality” LOL

        Listen, man… I’m all for LBGT+ people rights, but let’s be real donating few thousands on a campaign is far from “inhuman immorality”.

        • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So now you have double standards on morality, just to bash Mozilla? Please demonstrate more mental gymnastics.