this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2025
120 points (94.1% liked)

Linux

50579 readers
1447 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
120
Which browser do you use and why? (lemmy.selfhostcat.com)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Using firefox but concerned now

Read about some alternatives:

Edit 2/28: It seems there is no general consensus if we should switch and/or to what.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I understand completely your point of view but I wouldn't use the stock Firefox as it's not private enough and it has really bad features

And do you think that most Firefox users donate to Mozilla?

Using Firefox (even a fork) supports the work of Mozilla, like using chromium browser support the work of google

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

And do you think that most Firefox users donate to Mozilla?

No, most don't donate directly, but some do use some of the features that indirectly do provide funds. Like for example, would a search engine be willing to pay Mozilla to have them be a default search engine if it had no users?

I feel the weight of Firefox being a popular browser has allowed them to have some partnerships and carry on some strategies that are likely to have been a source of funds. I expect many people do not turn off sponsored links and other features that are likely to help them support the browser and that are likely not available in the forks.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

So you recommend people to use the google search engine? :(

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

No I did not say that. Do you recommend people to use their browser on default settings?

Mozilla gets paid for having it be the default, regardless of whether the user switches it. They get to make money from it because of the number of users alone being already something interesting to target for their partners. So just you using the browser is beneficial for Mozilla, even if you turn all the sponsored features off.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

So it's the same as if your were using a fork nah? The only difference is that mozilla does know that you use a Firefox browser because telemetry is disabled

[–] [email protected] 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

No, it's not the same. Firedragon users have a different default. I'll repeat the question that you didn't answer yet:

"would a search engine be willing to pay Mozilla to have them be a default search engine if it (upstream Firefox) had no users?"

And this is just an example. There are many other forms of partnership possible beyond search engines.. the point is that the number of users that actually are exposed to the default browser settings (ie. the users of upstream Firefox, whether they change the settings or not) does give some leverage for making funds out of, while still giving options/freedom to the users who can freely change the setting.

When you watch a video article with sponsored content, even if you skip the sponsor, the creator still benefits because it builds up the numbers and that's what attracts sponsors.. but if someone starts re-posting the videos with the sponsor bits cut out and the re-posting channel becomes MORE popular than the original to the point that the original gets much less views... do you think companies are gonna want to still have as many sponsor deals with that creator who now gets very few views on their sponsored content?