Some time during the election year for the US presidency. They were pushing a campaign that was coercing Facebook to censor even more.
When you opened a new tab/window the message would show up at the bottom. I think it was originally a notification for new features and the like but they couldn't help themselves but to hijack it for politics.
They were pressuring companies to stop advertising on Facebook until they censor whatever the left doesn't like by throwing around the usual buzzwords.
I always liked Firefox, tried Waterfox for a bit too. Settled on Brave. Firefox got too "normie" and Waterfox kept having issues with sites. Brave just works for the most part.
Whatever issues I was having was more like something to do with pages not loading. I'm not totally sure I blame the browser. It could have been uBlock, or just websites being shitty.
There are two versions of Waterfox. Classic is based on old FF and has issues with some newer sites but the new mainline is based on relatively current FF and pretty much works everywhere. There is a caveat that it is now owned by an ad company...
Brave breaks a lot of websites, but I still use it. It's easy enough to restore them. I guess my point is: Still too many websites that do not want to work in a browser that respects your privacy. Selling your privacy is still how they fund themselves. If they just wanted to display a banner ad, that's so simple. No javascript or nothing necessary.
Old-school open source culture/projects were developed by the figurative (and sometimes literal) "dude in his basement". Once described by Linus in a post to the kernel mailing list as (paraphrased) "I'm just a dude working on this stuff at home in my bathrobe; no one's paying me to be polite or politically correct". One of the guys who worked on a rather core part of the kernel was a self-taught ambulance driver who did it as an evening hobby.
The Mozilla Foundation was and is a non-profit run like a corporation complete with a CEO and marketing, HR, and PR departments. Stuff the old-school programmers were trying to escape by doing open source. The primary contributors to Firefox were and are employees of that Foundation. And nowadays a lot of the kernel development is done by employees of Intel and Red Hat employed for the express purpose of doing that work.
The fat feminists were only allowed to gain a foothold because open source culture disappeared and was replaced with corporate culture because the community of "skilled, independent people" was replaced with employees of giant companies paying for a work product. But this predated the fat feminists showing up.
Though even this analysis is incomplete because it ignores the "Linus effect": the independent left-leaning programmers in left-wing enclaves who didn't like political correctness but also didn't like being grouped together with the "evil right" and ultimately decided to become politically correct (or at least stop counter-signaling it) to side with their tribe. Under normal circumstances these people can't stand the useless left-wing "activist" types but ultimately understand they're all on the same side. They'll gladly work with a Black trans-lesbian but simply want "her" to be good at "her" job.
No, they exist. I personally know some. They just don't care too much about woke stuff. They'd rather argue for socialized healthcare or outlawing guns.
They exist but either don't ever fight back against the woke left (and ultimately vote the exact same way as the woke left) or become right-wing. I know some of the former and am myself the latter.
Of course I agree. They know have to share a "side" with wokists, but ultimately end up voting the same. In the same vein we share a side with rednecks - but at least rednecks understand why we need guns.
It's funny, I can see why leftists think the way they do, "healthcare for all" and "guns bad" all seem like good ideals to hold on the surface, but then it becomes obvious to some people like us, who perhaps slowly realized what's correct, that they're ridiculous.
They had power and they handed it to the woke lefties.
Agree completely.
JK Rowling and the "intellectual dark web" are not a voting bloc - there are about as many of them among the gen. pop. as there are nevertrump neocons.
I think there's a ton more of them than this, but they lack power over their party. I've voted liberal my whole life and I'm not going to do it next time. I will vote for people like desantis in a heartbeat over these fucked up assholes the dems put in power now.
That is to say, generously, that they represent about a fraction of a percent of the Democrat coalition.
I do not agree, but the problem as you put it is they have barely any power in their party. Maybe "none" would be more accurate.
This is an excellent topic to bring up here. It's relatively easy to find recommendations for privacy oriented browsers but we really need good suggestions for privacy oriented browsers that aren't woke. We obviously shouldn't be supporting woketard companies out of principle, but there's also the issue of browser quality and privacy/security. Do you really want to open yourself up the possibility of your browser reporting to some politburo that you're visiting "problematic" websites or censoring those sites all together? Or running ads to raise money for commies? Or having a privacy/security leak either out of spite or because of diversity hire's fuck up? Or make the browser worse solely to spite its white male power users? Firefox already did the last one by putting the close multiple tabs options into a submenu for the sole purpose of making it less convenient for power users.
Mozilla has been a woke lunatic asylum for a while now. Too bad the blurry font rendering on Chromium browsers makes them unusable for me, not that their developers are any less corrupt.
I’ve used Firefox forever and I can’t remember ever seeing an ad. Where do they even put them? Do they load them up automatically when you start the browser or something?
Everything woke turns to shit. I ditched them when they started showing in-browser activist leftist campaign bullshit.
the robot ads? when was the in browser activist campaign? or for the homepage adds 'feature' that they snuck in?
Some time during the election year for the US presidency. They were pushing a campaign that was coercing Facebook to censor even more.
When you opened a new tab/window the message would show up at the bottom. I think it was originally a notification for new features and the like but they couldn't help themselves but to hijack it for politics.
Was it this one, "stop hate for profit?"
Yea I think that was the one.
They were pressuring companies to stop advertising on Facebook until they censor whatever the left doesn't like by throwing around the usual buzzwords.
I remember when they fired the competent male boss because of the donation. I use Brave now for mobile couldn't be happier.
To what did he donate that was so "problematic"?
Anti gay marriage.
I always liked Firefox, tried Waterfox for a bit too. Settled on Brave. Firefox got too "normie" and Waterfox kept having issues with sites. Brave just works for the most part.
Still using waterfox. If brave had something like containers I'd probably give them another whirl.
No issues with waterfox (G4.0.8 on Fedora 36).
Whatever issues I was having was more like something to do with pages not loading. I'm not totally sure I blame the browser. It could have been uBlock, or just websites being shitty.
There are two versions of Waterfox. Classic is based on old FF and has issues with some newer sites but the new mainline is based on relatively current FF and pretty much works everywhere. There is a caveat that it is now owned by an ad company...
FF is mozila/whatever based. every other broweser (incl edge) is now chrome based
Brave breaks a lot of websites, but I still use it. It's easy enough to restore them. I guess my point is: Still too many websites that do not want to work in a browser that respects your privacy. Selling your privacy is still how they fund themselves. If they just wanted to display a banner ad, that's so simple. No javascript or nothing necessary.
I believe Waterfox sold out to an ad company, which has the potential to be a problem. I'm not sure how bad the privacy situation is in practice.
Kinda where I'm at too. It's nice that it has native adblock as well.
https://kiwibrowser.com/
Estonian company
Supports your standard fare chrome extensions
I disagree with this take somewhat.
Old-school open source culture/projects were developed by the figurative (and sometimes literal) "dude in his basement". Once described by Linus in a post to the kernel mailing list as (paraphrased) "I'm just a dude working on this stuff at home in my bathrobe; no one's paying me to be polite or politically correct". One of the guys who worked on a rather core part of the kernel was a self-taught ambulance driver who did it as an evening hobby.
The Mozilla Foundation was and is a non-profit run like a corporation complete with a CEO and marketing, HR, and PR departments. Stuff the old-school programmers were trying to escape by doing open source. The primary contributors to Firefox were and are employees of that Foundation. And nowadays a lot of the kernel development is done by employees of Intel and Red Hat employed for the express purpose of doing that work.
The fat feminists were only allowed to gain a foothold because open source culture disappeared and was replaced with corporate culture because the community of "skilled, independent people" was replaced with employees of giant companies paying for a work product. But this predated the fat feminists showing up.
Though even this analysis is incomplete because it ignores the "Linus effect": the independent left-leaning programmers in left-wing enclaves who didn't like political correctness but also didn't like being grouped together with the "evil right" and ultimately decided to become politically correct (or at least stop counter-signaling it) to side with their tribe. Under normal circumstances these people can't stand the useless left-wing "activist" types but ultimately understand they're all on the same side. They'll gladly work with a Black trans-lesbian but simply want "her" to be good at "her" job.
No, they exist. I personally know some. They just don't care too much about woke stuff. They'd rather argue for socialized healthcare or outlawing guns.
They exist but either don't ever fight back against the woke left (and ultimately vote the exact same way as the woke left) or become right-wing. I know some of the former and am myself the latter.
Of course I agree. They know have to share a "side" with wokists, but ultimately end up voting the same. In the same vein we share a side with rednecks - but at least rednecks understand why we need guns.
It's funny, I can see why leftists think the way they do, "healthcare for all" and "guns bad" all seem like good ideals to hold on the surface, but then it becomes obvious to some people like us, who perhaps slowly realized what's correct, that they're ridiculous.
Disagree completely, but the problem is they have absolutely no power.
Agree completely.
I think there's a ton more of them than this, but they lack power over their party. I've voted liberal my whole life and I'm not going to do it next time. I will vote for people like desantis in a heartbeat over these fucked up assholes the dems put in power now.
I do not agree, but the problem as you put it is they have barely any power in their party. Maybe "none" would be more accurate.
This is an excellent topic to bring up here. It's relatively easy to find recommendations for privacy oriented browsers but we really need good suggestions for privacy oriented browsers that aren't woke. We obviously shouldn't be supporting woketard companies out of principle, but there's also the issue of browser quality and privacy/security. Do you really want to open yourself up the possibility of your browser reporting to some politburo that you're visiting "problematic" websites or censoring those sites all together? Or running ads to raise money for commies? Or having a privacy/security leak either out of spite or because of diversity hire's fuck up? Or make the browser worse solely to spite its white male power users? Firefox already did the last one by putting the close multiple tabs options into a submenu for the sole purpose of making it less convenient for power users.
Was Brave's issue with the archive sites ever fixed? I know they were blocking Brave users over a dispute they had with the developers at once point.
every mobile browser will do this.
I used a fork of firefox called waterfox. It was made by liberty minded people who split off from Firefox when it got infested by wokies.
It works perfectly.
Firefox only has 4% market share?? Lmao
I haven't checked in forever. That's hilarious.
The 4% includes mobile though. They're at about 10% on desktop.
Firefox 2011 was so fucking fast and had a perfect UI, literally nothing improved except for sacking Flash since then, but that wasn't their choice.
Brave browser and now search
Mozilla has been a woke lunatic asylum for a while now. Too bad the blurry font rendering on Chromium browsers makes them unusable for me, not that their developers are any less corrupt.
I’ve used Firefox forever and I can’t remember ever seeing an ad. Where do they even put them? Do they load them up automatically when you start the browser or something?
ive been on waterfox for a while, seems good
Related
I jumped ship the minute that I couldn't turn "pocket" off on mobile.
Now I only use it when brave wont load a page that I have to use for work, etc.