I was initially against DRM support, but in hindsight I believe FF would have quickly slipped into irrelevance without it.
this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
163 points (95.0% liked)
Firefox
19149 readers
12 users here now
A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, with standards you have to pick your battles like that. It would have been perceived badly, and anything else Firefox would have wanted to do would have been shot down with that used as the example. A good stake in the ground they made was with manifest v3 and not arbitrarily trying to stop ad blockers, and they had the power to do that, granted less of a standard.
Exactly. DRM is up to the user, whereas Manifest v3... isn't.
A curated list of jwz’s comments on Mozilla, the organization he started 27 years ago.
| Date | Post |
|---|---|
| 2013-10-02 | W3C green-lights adding DRM to the Web's standards |
| 2020-09-23 | This is a pretty dire assessment of Mozilla |
| 2022-01-06 | Mozilla blinked |
| 2023-12-29 | Remember when Mozilla made a web browser? |
| 2024-01-05 | My dinosaur just threw up in its mouth a little |
| 2024-06-20 | Mozilla is an advertising company now |
| 2024-06-22 | Mozilla's Original Sin |
| 2024-10-03 | Mozilla's CEO doubles down on them being an advertising company now |
2020-09-23 This is a pretty dire assessment of Mozilla
I don't really care about DRM, users can disable it if they want.
I have serious issues with Mozilla over the highlighted comment, and it goes way past 2020. I have only really cared about Mozilla as a web browser and web standards org, and they seem to want the organization to go beyond that. That's why I don't fund them, they're not focused, so my money would go to random things I care little about.
I think a lot of people feel this way. And it really seems like Mozilla is pushing hard on this "we're not just a web browser" thing, yet most users just want them to be a web browser. So Mozilla will continue justifying things users don't want (e.g. Pocket, AI nonsense, etc) because it helps with some other initiative unrelated to the browser.
That's probably ultimately what's going to drive me away, and I think it'll ultimately lead to Mozilla failing its other missions. Once LadyBird is usable, I'll probably switch, because they don't have the same lack of focus that Mozilla does.
I’ll probably stick with FF-derivatives like LibreWolf & Mullvad unless & until Mozilla changes something that ruins things downstream. If they do, I’d consider my WebKit-based options.
Isnt mullvad dead? I sw they stopped updating
No, that's Mull. Mullvad is maintained.
No
“Rich through failure” describes a lot of manchildren.
Apparently some parts of their websites are now not working due to outstanding bills
Bring back netscape navigator
I need that page loading animation back
I like how he said that its a nothing burger because they're only putting this out because some legislation defined selling your shit as selling your shit.
Well, uh, yeah. The legislation is correct. Providing access for consideration is selling your shit. I don't care how many layers of bullshit they slather on top.
Yet another reminder that Rossman is petit bourgeois that got involved because some larger company stepped on his business model (repairing electronics).