"the company looked at the history of social media over the past decade and didn’t like what it saw… existing companies that are only model motivated by profit and just insane user growth, and are willing to tolerate and amplify really toxic content because it looks like engagement… "

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I like Mozilla, I respect their mission and their good nature. I can’t help but feel the billions they receive from Google make it too easy for them to be, at best, unfocused and, at worst, lazy. They offer a lot of random services like this. I fear this play is just chasing another possible mediocre revenue generator for them. Like pocket, like Mozilla vpn and private relay, etc.

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      84
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Maintaining a web browser is an intensely cost and time prohibitive endeavor, especially nowadays. The FOSS community can maintain a lot of things but the sheer scale of Firefox, the need for expertise, the necessary labor, it just can’t be done by volunteers and donations, at least not without using Chromium. They have to get a cash infusion from somewhere.

      I don’t like it anymore than you do but ultimately the issue isn’t Mozilla, it’s the state of the technology market. Silicon Valley is no place for a non-profit organization right now, no matter how much we need it.

      What we need is regulations and anti-trust, but even that may not truly save us.

      They need money. That’s it. That’s the long and short of it.

        • Matt@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          1 year ago

          Those donations cannot be used for Firefox development due to the structure of Mozilla.

          • Midnitte@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not entirely sure that’s true. The money goes to Mozilla and Mozilla will use it to fund Firefox (and other projects). It seems to work exactly how one would expect it to work - you just can’t donate directly to a project such as Firefox.

            There are limits to how much money they can move to projects due to their structure as a 501©3, (but all of their projects are towards an open web) so maybe not all of the funding goes to Firefox, but it still does go to Firefox.

            • Matt@lemdro.id
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Firefox is part of the for-profit Mozilla Corporation. Donations go to the nonprofit Mozilla Foundation. Even though Mozilla Corporation is owned by Mozilla Foundation, donations cannot be transferred to it since it is still legally a for-profit business. The funds donated to Mozilla Foundation are used for advocacy work.

        • Zana@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I get paid next week and will definitely be donating, thank you for the link!

      • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        This seems like a reasonable and insightful take. Is there a way a non-profit could still survive in silicon valley? For ex, IETF isn’t a profit focused organization.

        • Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not sure if this qualifies exactly but the FOSS 3D package Blender has been surviving for quite some time. They’re in Amsterdam, not silicon valley, but they seem to do really well off primarily donations and funding from some big companies.

          • IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the key there is funding from big companies. There’s tons of standards and the like in which big companies take part - both in terms of code and financial support. Big projects like the rust compiler, the Linux kernel, blender, etc. all seem to have a lot of code and money coming in from big companies. Sadly there’s only so much you can get from individuals - pretty much the only success story I know of is the wikimedia foundation.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        What’s stopping web standards from being made simple or unchanging enough for a smaller project to maintain a functional web browser?

        • SpaceScotsman@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          At this point the web is about as complex as an operating system in terms of complexity. That needs really strong specific standards in order for it to work, and in turn projects like web browsers are huge and complex.

          If someone wanted to build a web browser that only followed the simpler parts of the specifications, it wouldn’t work for many websites* and people would not use that browser.

          *Whether or not sites need to be so complex is another question entirely, but the reality right now is that they are

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Occasionally when I do web stuff I look into the big frameworks but quickly get overwhelmed and go back to simple html/css/js, so yeah I kind of just don’t get what the point is or why anyone needs or wants complexity there. Large websites always do most stuff serverside anyway it seems, so where is this complexity even getting used? It is very mysterious to me. Suspect Google etc. are pushing stuff no one needs in this regard as well to move the web towards something only they can handle.

            • dan@upvote.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              simple html/css/js,

              There’s a very large number of DOM and browser APIs now though… Even with basic JS without libraries or frameworks, you can still build fancy 2D and 3D graphics (WebGL), interact with USB devices, allow input via game controllers, stream H264 video, implement custom caching, use push notifications, and a bunch of other things. The web browser has to implement all of that complexity. They’re all useful in different scenarios.

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hope they hit on something stand-out soon. To establish more sustainability. Seems like everything is in change right now.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      What should they be doing instead? Begging for donations? I do agree in general, tho. Seems they should at least be squirreling away some (or most) of that money into a foundation, because they’re obviously going to need it one day.

    • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Would be great if they did not get money from google. They could set.up a donations program or something and regularly ask for it like Wikipedia. Donation based browser, peoples Browser.

      • krakenx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You can donate to Mozilla, and I do. https://donate.mozilla.org/en-GB/

        A lot of people will have to donate a lot to equal the amount they are getting from Google though, and if Google pulls that money I feel that Firefox would end before people donate enough to make up the shortfall.

        • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Money donated to Mozilla goes o ly ti the foundation. The money paid by Google goes to the Mozilla Corp (Firefox).

      • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Asking for a donation would be a damn near fatal blow to retention and they know it. Given how its going with Google’s anti-trust case though, they’ll need to ask for money at some point.

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like this relationship of: one company pays a competitor to promote an unrelated product that could very reasonably be used to engage in anti-competitive behavior should at the very least be heavily regulated by the SEC, or possibly just outright prohibited. Alphabet is the epitome of the mega-corporation who has the resources to compete viciously in almost any industry, but has the breadth for plausible deniability about who their competition is.

      “What? Mozilla isn’t competition…browser? Oh you mean chrome? That little thing? Nah, we just do that on the side. We’re an ad company.”

      Meanwhile: “What? Meta? You mean like Facebook? We don’t compete with them, hah, remember Google+? They compete with TikTok…Oh ads? I guess so, but that’s kind of a side thing. We do mobile os/web analytics/email/whatever.”

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

      Yeah revenue generator… They want a full name to get on the wait list, no reason for that except marketing.

  • Kushan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    34
    ·
    1 year ago

    We desperately need a company like Mozilla to take the reigns of something like Lemmy. The original developers are far too biased and short sighted to see the bigger picture, it needs to be an independent group that promotes more open source development.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s open source, anyone can fork the repo any time they want. The original devs won’t like it but also there is bugger all they can do about it. It’s just that it would be a full time job to take on and no one has the time.

    • arthurpizza@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The solution for capitalism-out-of-control is not more capitalism. The less big money players in the fediverse the better.

      • Midnight@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Mozilla is a non profit. The most “capitalist” they get is the Mozilla Corp a company owned by the foundation which is basically just for tax purposes. Having a big player in the fediverse helps.

        • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They are funded by Google. I much prefer the “some random guys or whoever will fork their code” model of software for this sort of thing.

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

            Google pays them to be the default search engine, they’re not funded by Google.

              • Kushan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The rights to search sure are, but it’s more like Google happens to be the one paying it right now. It could be Microsoft or Yahoo or anyone.

                Mozilla definitely needs to diversity better here, but the implication that they’re “funded by google” is completely misleading.

                • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The rights to search sure are, but it’s more like Google happens to be the one paying it right now. It could be Microsoft or Yahoo or anyone.

                  I don’t buy that what they are paid reflects the value of their search rights. Google has antitrust interest in the continued existence of Firefox, that’s why they would pay them, doesn’t matter what they say it’s for.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What we need is a bunch of small groups and companies. It isn’t a problem if there isn’t a giant centralization of power.

        You don’t see Salsa companies ruining tomatoes

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

        God someone needs to help friendica. Mastodon and lemmy both have pretty decent ux. Friendica looks like it’s from 2006.

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      What do you mean? I haven’t followed the development directly, I’ve just been a user and so far things seem to be going pretty well. Curious what shortsightedness you are talking about?

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think Mozilla has poor judgment and bad leadership. I don’t mind if they participate but they shouldn’t be in charge

    • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I’ve considered leaving Lemmy because of who is in charge of development right now. They were not ready for its sudden burst in popularity and are not handling it well.

        • spaduf@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The biggest issues that have come up so far are moderation and database optimization. The moderation issue is significant enough that large instances have considered shutting down, but the database optimization thing is what really drives me crazy. It is absurdly expensive for hosts considering we only have 35k MAU (just one of our midsized instances should be able to host the whole userbase for the cost they currently pay) and it has been largely deprioritized to the point that contributors who have tried to fix it have been told off.

          It’s one thing if it’s just a couple of devs working on the project and trying their best, it’s an entirely different thing when a couple of devs are shutting out large numbers of contributors (frequently subject matter experts which they desperately need at this point) over relatively trivial issues. At this point a significant number of users have been lost because the devs have been largely unable to capitalize on previous waves on growth due to slow development.

          Not to mention things like authorized fetch, which if fixed would ensure Lemmy/Mastodon interoperability and would effectively make Lemmy the go to place for groups on the fediverse. This would constitute a huge boost in engagement from the broader fediverse.

          Because of all this Lemmy has an awful reputation even among the rest of the fediverse and particularly among people who have tried to contribute. A fork would probably be a significant improvement as far as brand perception goes.

          • ericjmorey@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That post seems like an overreaction. Which makes me think that the linked GitHub issue is just the straw that broke the patience of the developer that has moved on. Which is fair, but their action to post an emotional and negative public announcement is as immature as the thing they’re complaining about.

          • Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am a dev, but not a Rust dev.

            Rust, Go, and C# look like the future to me. Everyone is moving to strongly typed, explicitly typed languages for a reason.

            Rust is as fast as it gets, and much much safer and easier than C or C++ at the cost of slightly odder syntax than higher level languages.

            Microsoft has done great things with C# and open source and multi-platforming. It’s the easiest, quickest, safest way to develop business applications. The performance is really pretty good until you compare it to Rust.

            Go is between the two, but probably a little closer to Rust.

            Other languages will stick around the same way Fortran has still been in use despite being deprecated for 30 years. But really nobody should be developing anything new in PHP.

      • tehbilly@le.ptr.is
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh snap, as someone who’s recently joined, do you have some information you could point me to?

        • Kichae@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can have as many forks as you want, but that’s a software engineer’s solution to a social problem. Lemmy is the “name brand” now for ActivityPub based federated content aggregation, and it will be orders of magnitudes more difficult to get support for forks, both from a contributor and from a user perspective.

          Just look at last year’s Twitter migration, and the sea of people complaining about Mastodon not having features they felt were a requirement for adoption, while also ignoring every other Mastodon alternative on the Fediverse that had everything they were looking for.

            • spaduf@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              As I see it, there are three major ways a fork could gain significant standing among the community:

              • They could get features out faster. Scaled sort would’ve been absolutely pivotal during a migrationary wave, as it would have allowed small communities to gain exposure on the front page in a far more natural and organic way. Currently new communities are largely dependent on the community spotlight subs and there’s not a whole lot of ways to actually gain momentum after that initial posting.
              • They could improve performance and appeal to admins. The current cost of hosting Lemmy is fairly bloated from my understanding.
              • They could invest in moderation. Beehaw would certainly be interested.

              I honestly think any one of these is easily manageable by a handful of people in off time. Other parts of the fediverse of similar size are chock full of forks.

          • spaduf@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Lemmy is the “name brand” now for ActivityPub based federated content aggregation

            Lemmy has an awful reputation even among the rest of the fediverse and particularly among people who have tried to contribute. A fork would probably be a significant improvement as far as brand perception goes.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where do you get that from? I have no love for tankies, but from what I’ve seen, they’ve built a product that’s free of their biases, opensourced it and thrown it over the wall with no strings attached.

      If you want to make a rooten-tooten white supremacist nazi instance with Lemmy, you can do exactly that. Nobody has to federate with you, and you don’t have to federate with them.

      Strange take.

      • spaduf@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Strange take.

        Not for folks who have been following the development. It’s one thing if it’s just a couple of devs working on the project and trying their best, it’s an entirely different thing when a couple of devs are shutting out large numbers of contributors (frequently subject matter experts which they desperately need at this point) over relatively trivial issues. It’s become a pattern and will almost certainly continue. At this point a significant number of users have been lost because the devs have been largely unable to capitalize on previous waves on growth due to slow development. Because of all this Lemmy has an awful reputation even among the rest of the fediverse and particularly among people who have tried to contribute. A fork would probably be a significant improvement as far as brand perception goes.

      • deus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It seems to me they’re saying Lemmy needs corporate backing to grow? Cause if they were so bothered by the opinions of the Lemmy devs they could simply use Kbin instead.

        • Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well that or use an instance that isn’t theirs, or doesn’t even federate with theirs, or simply block theirs.🤔 I mean this is really throwing the baby out with the bath water.

          I have no strong love for leninists/stalinists, and think they accomplish little other than making actual socialists look bad while not being socialist themselves. But I’m not that put off by them. They’re generally fairly intellectually weak, and easy to maneuver around. Should you choose to interact with them.

            • deus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The Lemmy devs have no power over instances they do not run themselves.

              • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Other than writing the software that all of those instances use to stay up to date and in contact with each other, regardless of their federation status.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I hope there instance doesn’t get really big. That would be a recipe for disaster especially since they don’t seem to have a plan to financial stability

    • thawed_caveman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Shifting the power from a CEO to an instance admin is a massive improvement.

      One has autocratic control over the entire site, potentially hundreds of millions of users, investors breathing down their neck, server infrastructure, and other systemic pressures; meanwhile, a fediverse instance admin has autocratic control over nothing but their own instance, a few thousand users at most, with the only money and hardware involved being their own.

      The fediverse is incredibly more horizontal and decentralized than any corporate social media, the improvement is massive. And i’m a believer that vertical structures and concentrations of power are at the root of a lot of problems in society, so this is gravy to me.

      But yes, it’s worth remembering that it’s not completely decentralized, and admins still have absolute power over their instance. My Mastodon instance admin doesn’t want us to use the name GIMP to refer to the open source image manipulator; they say “gimp” is a slur aimed at disabled people, which i’ve never heard before in my life.

    • qaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You can pick your own instance and switch later. It thus allows you to choose an admin/moderation team, something that’s impossible with traditional social media.

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

      Difference is that YOU CAN BE THE ADMIN whenever you want while still being able to talk to others. Over.