[jx47]

I think the difference between the criticism of Chrome and the criticism of Firefox lies in the marketing. Firefox is constantly telling me that they are the good guys. The last bastion of privacy and user-first on the web. But in reality they are doing a lot of questionable and shady stuff that that they need to be called out for.

[danShumway]

Well sure, call them out on that stuff.

But don't then finish that callout by saying that nothing matters and that trying to fight against browser monoculture is pointless.

The "final thoughts" section of this article is depressing to read. There is absolutely still a difference between Mozilla and Google, and it is absolutely still worth fighting to avoid a browser monoculture, even if there's only a small chance of success.

I definitely agree that Mozilla has problems, but that's not the thrust of this article. The thrust of the article is that Mozilla has problems, and therefore everyone's efforts to improve the web are meaningless.

[zajio1am]

> There is absolutely still a difference between Mozilla and Google

General attitude of these corporations is one thing, but is there really a difference between Firefox and Chromium w.r.t. privacy?

[danShumway]

Yes, I think so. Firefox ships with a ton of anti-fingerprinting features that can be enabled in about:config (many of them lifted directly from Tor), containers are an intuitive way for people to isolate sites from each other, Encrypted DNS is turned on by default (Chrome only upgrades to encrypted DNS by default if the current resolver supports it), and Firefox's addon API for adblocking is already slightly more capable than Chromium's, and will be much more capable once Manifest V3 ships.