As highlighted in TechCrunch's article, Mozilla's exploration of the Fediverse has been truly captivating. They have been working steadily and thoughtfully, achieving remarkable advancements.
I must confess, I have been observing mozilla.social for quite some time. The choice to fork Elk and utilize it as a front end for their server was a clever move. It will be captivating to witness how Mozilla enhances the onboarding experience for its users.
https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/03/why-mozilla-is-betting-on-a-decentralized-social-networking-future/
@fediversenews@venera.social
Submitted 1 year ago by atomicpoet@firefish.city to fediversenews@venera.social
183231bcb@transfem.social 1 year ago
@atomicpoet@firefish.city @fediversenews@venera.social When Gargron sat down to have a conversation with Facebook about the fediverse, he was criticized for selling out to a spyware company.
When Mozilla openly collaborates with Facebook to develop spyware and build it into their browser (while falsely marketing it as "privacy"), they get praised for "enhancing" the fediverse.
I wonder if there is even a hypothetical action Mozilla could take that would cause them to lose their status as the fediverse's favorite software developer?
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/privacy-preserving-attribution-for-advertising/
kopper@brain.d.on-t.work 1 year ago
@183231bcb@transfem.social @atomicpoet@firefish.city @fediversenews@venera.social
Rebasing Firefox on top of a Chromium base would do it. But then if they end up needing to stoop that low for whatever reason I can't imagine they'd have very long left as an organization.dans_root@mastodon.social 1 year ago
@183231bcb @atomicpoet @fediversenews Well, whatever it is, it’s probably better than what we have now with all the cookies and trackers doing profiling on an individual level. And a web without advertising is not going to happen.
Edit: why does “Mozilla“ need a content warning?