[esperent]

> If the audience of HN is not able to make that sacrifice (not use some of the GOOG's website) then we deserve the monopoly of Chrome.

The audience of HN is unlikely to make a difference here.

Besides, we are not some political party who all need to vote in one way together. Each person individually here makes their own choices.

Personally I think making my life harder with pointless sacrifices is not useful. I ask myself, am I making this sacrifice to make myself feel good, or because I actually think it can make a change? In this case, I don't think it would make any difference and it wouldn't make me feel good so there's no utility in using Firefox, for me.

This subject - browser monopoly, and related things like OS or app store monopoly - needs to be tackled with regulation, not personal sacrifices.

[erklik]

> The audience of HN is unlikely to make a difference here.

The audience of HN and devs in large, are the ones who've contributed to the monopoly of Chrome. Us only testing and creating applications for Chrome led to this.

I never said that people don't make their own choice. Of course they do. My point was that if we are going to complain about Chrome, then Firefox is a perfectly fine alternative and is currently the best way to change GOOG's ways is by voting with our feet.

Would regulation be nice? Sure. I doubt it's coming though so for the moment, our only alternative to not living in a ad-infested hellscape is to use Firefox.