[eastbound]

> The solution is very simple: uninstall Chrome and Chromium.

No. Firefox, beyond being slower, also keeps constantly displaying ads… for itself. Want to open a new tab? “Big Browser cares about your privacy, read how!” I just want to open a new tab!!! I’m working! Restarting? “Discover what’s new with Firefox”, “Hohoho, we care about your privacy, LOOK HOW MUCH WE CARE! ALSO WE HAVE NO ADS!” Worse, they suggest to solve privacy that I use Mozilla VPN. VPNs don’t solve privacy. Also, it’s a paid ad for a paid product.

Mozilla had also a staunch political slant, going as far as firing a CEO for a donation he made to the opposing group years ago. There is nothing neutral here, if you are not a leftist, it’s dangerous to use or even give your participation to that ecosystem.

Mozilla has failed to become the no-ads, better-ethics, privacy-aware navigator (pun intended). They keep performing worse actions than Google all the time.

[Lev1a]

> Firefox, beyond being slower, also keeps constantly displaying ads

One tab with an ad opening when the browser has updated every few weeks or so is not what I would call "keeps constantly displaying ads".

[michaelmrose]

There isn't a moral dimension attached to loving the right kind of people and gay and straight people are equally moral in pursuing relationships with significant others. On the other hand there is a moral dimension to trying to take away our fellow citizens rights. The CEO as the face of the org became unsuitable to his role when he acted publicly and objectively immorally in support of those who would gut the rights of his fellows

He wasn't on the wrong side of a political issue he was on the wrong side of decency and morality. This ought not to be a leftist position nor should we fear that the tyranny of excessive concern for others may be imposed upon us. Should we decide to use Firefox for evil as it were the privacy both endorsed and adhered to by Mozilla precludes them discovering it let alone stopping us.

The position of user of Firefox and public face of Firefox are inherently different positions and come with different reasonable expectations but I think you knew that.

> it’s dangerous to use or even give your participation to that ecosystem.

Please describe precisely the threat model you fill most applicable

> keeps constantly displaying ads

For a definition of constantly redefined to mean rarely when a new major version comes out.

> They keep performing worse actions than Google all the time.

The context here is that google tracks everything you do and regularly shares it with the government including under terms that are obviously abusive of user privacy and including to repressive governments, are in the middle of attempting to destroy ad blocking by pushing locked down environments in the name of security. A move likely to have massive implications that will be impossible to manage or control in repressive dictatorships even if Google themselves do nothing to directly assist with mass surveillance in Orwellian states. Merely building general purpose tools virtually guarantees bad usage by repressive regimes. By contrast Mozilla has? Tried to pimp their VPN to you as part of their new version notification...

It really sounds like the Brenden Eich debacle has colored your perception of the situation and perhaps you need to step back and evaluate the situation objectively.

[knewter]

Brendan Eich getting fired was like watching the original internet get murdered by progressives. Everything since then has been about how I thought that would go.

[michaelmrose]

He spent money to promote misusing a legal process to as it turns out illegally take his fellow citizens rights away.

Why do you think that's acceptable?

[knewter]

A guy gave a $3100 dollars to a political cause of his choice that was on the ballot, and people with this ideology drove him out of the company he founded that fought very hard for internet freedoms.

Since then, Mozilla/Firefox has largely become irrelevant and absolutely no longer has the same privacy concerns and respects.

He donated money in opposition of a law he didn't want to pass. He didn't take anyone's rights away.

[notpushkin]

https://waterfox.net/ to the rescue.

[turquoisevar]

Surely you don't mean Waterfox that states in their FAQ[0]:

"Who owns Waterfox?"

"System1 now own Waterfox, but Alex Kontos is still leading the direction of Waterfox and will be for the foreseeable future."

And who's owner, System1, states at the top of their page[1]:

"System1 operates the most dynamic Responsive Acquisition Marketing Platform

Connecting high intent customers with advertisers at scale"

[0]: https://www.waterfox.net/docs/faq#5-who-owns-waterfox [1]: https://system1.com

[willywanker]

Get with the times, Waterfox is independent of System 1 now. https://www.waterfox.net/blog/2023/07/03/a-new-chapter-for-w...

[notpushkin]

I surely do mean exactly that particular Waterfox. I've had my fair share of concerns back in the day when System1 acqui(hi)red Waterfox, but I haven't seen any suspicious behaviour whatsoever so I'm pretty confident it's fine for the time being.

Of course, if you know a better browser (that is not Chromium-based), I'll be happy to hear your suggestions!