Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #26625 > unrolled thread

Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> - 2025-02-24 03:51 +0000
    Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-02-24 10:23 +0100
      Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-24 11:14 +0100
        Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-02-24 14:30 +0100
          Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-24 23:12 +0100
          Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-02-24 22:29 +0000
            Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-02-25 17:13 +0100
      Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2025-03-02 12:31 +0000
    Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-24 10:42 +0100
      Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-02-24 21:07 -0300
    Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI anthk <anthk@openbsd.home> - 2025-03-10 07:59 +0000
      Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2025-03-10 09:21 +0042
        Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2025-03-10 09:31 +0042
    Re: Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-04-13 16:21 +0100

#26625 — Firefox wants a bit of ads+AI

From the «browser game is lost?» department:
Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:42:27 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/141757/mozilla-once-again-confirms-its-all-about-ads-and-ai-now/


We’ve recognized that Mozilla faces major headwinds in terms of both
financial growth and mission impact. While Firefox remains the core of what
we do, we also need to take steps to diversify: investing in
privacy-respecting advertising to grow new revenue in the near term;
developing trustworthy, open source AI to ensure technical and product
relevance in the mid term; and creating online fundraising campaigns that
will draw a bigger circle of supporters over the long run. Mozilla’s impact
and survival depend on us simultaneously strengthening Firefox AND finding
new sources of revenue AND manifesting our mission in fresh ways. That is why
we’re working hard on all of these fronts.
↫ Mark Surman on the Mozilla blog[1]

None of this is new to anyone reading OSNews. I’ve been quite vocal about
Mozilla’s troubles and how it intends to address those troubles, and I’m
incredibly worried and concerned about the increasing efforts by Mozilla to
push advertising and “AI” to somehow find more revenue streams. I think this is
the wrong direction to take, and will not make up for the seemingly inevitable
loss of the Google search deal – and my biggest fear is that Firefox will get a
lot worse before Mozilla realises advertising and “AI” just aren’t compatible
with their mission and the morals and values of the last few remaining Firefox
users.

I don’t have any answers either, of course. Making a competitive browser is
hard, and clearly requires a lot of people and a lot of time. Donations are
fickle, nobody will pay for a browser, and relying on corporate sponsoring in
other forms than the Google search deal will just mean Firefox will become like
Chrome even faster, with more and more exceptions for “allowed” ads and
additional roadblocks for adblockers to try and work around. In essence, I
strongly believe that it is impossible to both earn money from online ads and
make a good browser. It’s one or the other – not both.

There’s basically no competition in the browser space, and if we lose Firefox,
the only other option is Chrome and its various skins. Not a future I’m looking
forward to.

Links:
[1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-leadership-growth-planning-updates/ (link)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26630

On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:

> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now

Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.

-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to 1740365475muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26638

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Marco Moock wrote:

> On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:
>
>> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
>
> Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.

This is the truth! But it has the weakness of being a fork of FF, so when 
FF dies, so will Pale moon. =(

I hope the ladybug browser will really take off! That could be exactly 
what we are all looking for! I do hope that ublock origin and privacy 
badger will be the two first extensions to be able to get to run on 
ladybug. ;)

Ladybug also had the wisdom to not cave in to demands from political 
activists to turn it into a DEI project. They said that they focus on 
technology and not on politics. I think this was a very wise move from 
them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26639

On 24.02.2025 11:14 Uhr D wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Marco Moock wrote:
> 
> > On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:
> >  
> >> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
> >>  
> >
> > Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.  
> 
> This is the truth! But it has the weakness of being a fork of FF, so
> when FF dies, so will Pale moon. =(

It diverged that much that the current FF is almost irrelevant for it.

> I hope the ladybug browser will really take off! That could be
> exactly what we are all looking for!

I hope too, but I have serious doubt.

> Ladybug also had the wisdom to not cave in to demands from political 
> activists to turn it into a DEI project. They said that they focus on 
> technology and not on politics. I think this was a very wise move
> from them.

A wise choice for every software.

-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to 1740392099muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26647

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Marco Moock wrote:

> On 24.02.2025 11:14 Uhr D wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Marco Moock wrote:
>>
>>> On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:
>>>
>>>> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
>>>>
>>>
>>> Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.
>>
>> This is the truth! But it has the weakness of being a fork of FF, so
>> when FF dies, so will Pale moon. =(
>
> It diverged that much that the current FF is almost irrelevant for it.

That's great news! Then there is hope!

>> I hope the ladybug browser will really take off! That could be
>> exactly what we are all looking for!
>
> I hope too, but I have serious doubt.
>
>> Ladybug also had the wisdom to not cave in to demands from political
>> activists to turn it into a DEI project. They said that they focus on
>> technology and not on politics. I think this was a very wise move
>> from them.
>
> A wise choice for every software.

This is the way!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26651

Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
> On 24.02.2025 11:14 Uhr D wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Marco Moock wrote:
> > 
> > > On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:
> > >  
> > >> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
> > >>  
> > >
> > > Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.  
> > 
> > This is the truth! But it has the weakness of being a fork of FF, so
> > when FF dies, so will Pale moon. =(
> 
> It diverged that much that the current FF is almost irrelevant for it.

How is Pale Moon funded?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26676

On 24.02.2025 22:29 Uhr Theo wrote:

> Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
> > On 24.02.2025 11:14 Uhr D wrote:
> >   
> > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Marco Moock wrote:
> > >   
> > > > On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:
> > > >    
> > > >> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI”
> > > >> now 
> > > >
> > > > Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.
> > > >    
> > > 
> > > This is the truth! But it has the weakness of being a fork of FF,
> > > so when FF dies, so will Pale moon. =(  
> > 
> > It diverged that much that the current FF is almost irrelevant for
> > it.  
> 
> How is Pale Moon funded?

By its users
(https://ko-fi.com/palemoon) and by refunds for using DuckDuckGo with the URL parameter.

-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to 1740432540muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26802

On 2025-02-24, Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
> On 24.02.2025 03:51 Uhr Retrograde wrote:
>
>> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it???s all about ads and ???AI??? now
>
> Confirms again that my choice of Pale Moon was a good decision.

Quick question: do you know if I switch to palemoon will it pick up and 
use my existing profiles etc?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26632

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Retrograde wrote:

> From the «browser game is lost?» department:
> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
> Author: Thom Holwerda
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:42:27 +0000
> Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/141757/mozilla-once-again-confirms-its-all-about-ads-and-ai-now/

It is very sad. They should remove the current CEO. Maybe it is time for 
me to step in, and drag Mozilla back to basics. Do a browser, fund it with 
donations, and that's it. Let's say I take 200k USD per year for the job, 
just the savings on CEO salary alone could fund an army of developers!

>
> We’ve recognized that Mozilla faces major headwinds in terms of both
> financial growth and mission impact. While Firefox remains the core of what
> we do, we also need to take steps to diversify: investing in
> privacy-respecting advertising to grow new revenue in the near term;
> developing trustworthy, open source AI to ensure technical and product
> relevance in the mid term; and creating online fundraising campaigns that
> will draw a bigger circle of supporters over the long run. Mozilla’s impact
> and survival depend on us simultaneously strengthening Firefox AND finding
> new sources of revenue AND manifesting our mission in fresh ways. That is why
> we’re working hard on all of these fronts.
> ↫ Mark Surman on the Mozilla blog[1]
>
> None of this is new to anyone reading OSNews. I’ve been quite vocal about
> Mozilla’s troubles and how it intends to address those troubles, and I’m
> incredibly worried and concerned about the increasing efforts by Mozilla to
> push advertising and “AI” to somehow find more revenue streams. I think this is
> the wrong direction to take, and will not make up for the seemingly inevitable
> loss of the Google search deal – and my biggest fear is that Firefox will get a
> lot worse before Mozilla realises advertising and “AI” just aren’t compatible
> with their mission and the morals and values of the last few remaining Firefox
> users.
>
> I don’t have any answers either, of course. Making a competitive browser is
> hard, and clearly requires a lot of people and a lot of time. Donations are
> fickle, nobody will pay for a browser, and relying on corporate sponsoring in
> other forms than the Google search deal will just mean Firefox will become like
> Chrome even faster, with more and more exceptions for “allowed” ads and
> additional roadblocks for adblockers to try and work around. In essence, I
> strongly believe that it is impossible to both earn money from online ads and
> make a good browser. It’s one or the other – not both.
>
> There’s basically no competition in the browser space, and if we lose Firefox,
> the only other option is Chrome and its various skins. Not a future I’m looking
> forward to.
>
> Links:
> [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-leadership-growth-planning-updates/ (link)
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26656

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

> On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, Retrograde wrote:
>
>> From the «browser game is lost?» department:
>> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
>> Author: Thom Holwerda
>> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:42:27 +0000
>> Link:
>> https://www.osnews.com/story/141757/mozilla-once-again-confirms-its-all-about-ads-and-ai-now/
>
> It is very sad. They should remove the current CEO. Maybe it is time
> for me to step in, and drag Mozilla back to basics. Do a browser, fund
> it with donations, and that's it. Let's say I take 200k USD per year
> for the job, just the savings on CEO salary alone could fund an army
> of developers!

Well said.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26860

On 2025-02-24, Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> wrote:
> From the «browser game is lost?» department:
> Title: Mozilla once again confirms it’s all about ads and “AI” now
> Author: Thom Holwerda
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:42:27 +0000
> Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/141757/mozilla-once-again-confirms-its-all-about-ads-and-ai-now/
>
>
> We’ve recognized that Mozilla faces major headwinds in terms of both
> financial growth and mission impact. While Firefox remains the core of what
> we do, we also need to take steps to diversify: investing in
> privacy-respecting advertising to grow new revenue in the near term;
> developing trustworthy, open source AI to ensure technical and product
> relevance in the mid term; and creating online fundraising campaigns that
> will draw a bigger circle of supporters over the long run. Mozilla’s impact
> and survival depend on us simultaneously strengthening Firefox AND finding
> new sources of revenue AND manifesting our mission in fresh ways. That is why
> we’re working hard on all of these fronts.
> ↫ Mark Surman on the Mozilla blog[1]
>
> None of this is new to anyone reading OSNews. I’ve been quite vocal about
> Mozilla’s troubles and how it intends to address those troubles, and I’m
> incredibly worried and concerned about the increasing efforts by Mozilla to
> push advertising and “AI” to somehow find more revenue streams. I think this is
> the wrong direction to take, and will not make up for the seemingly inevitable
> loss of the Google search deal – and my biggest fear is that Firefox will get a
> lot worse before Mozilla realises advertising and “AI” just aren’t compatible
> with their mission and the morals and values of the last few remaining Firefox
> users.
>
> I don’t have any answers either, of course. Making a competitive browser is
> hard, and clearly requires a lot of people and a lot of time. Donations are
> fickle, nobody will pay for a browser, and relying on corporate sponsoring in
> other forms than the Google search deal will just mean Firefox will become like
> Chrome even faster, with more and more exceptions for “allowed” ads and
> additional roadblocks for adblockers to try and work around. In essence, I
> strongly believe that it is impossible to both earn money from online ads and
> make a good browser. It’s one or the other – not both.
>
> There’s basically no competition in the browser space, and if we lose Firefox,
> the only other option is Chrome and its various skins. Not a future I’m looking
> forward to.
>
> Links:
> [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-leadership-growth-planning-updates/ (link)

As Dillo 3.2 supports MathSVG, I don't need any bloated browser at all.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26861

anthk <anthk@openbsd.home> wrote:

> As Dillo 3.2 supports MathSVG, I don't need any bloated browser at all.

\o/ _____( Yayyyyy Dillo! )

Dillo reliably makes me smile.

The other browser I currently keep an eye on is Chawan.  Guess why!

Hint: It's not only about SVG.  I just tried MathSVG today, but this
cutie has some other hidden qualities too:

    <https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=54845#p54845>

-- 
Fact checking died.  Now we can call Trump smart without fearing
consequences?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26862

yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:

>     <https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=54845#p54845>

Upsi....!
 
<https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=54846#p54846>

-- 
I do not bite, I just want to play.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27213

On 24/02/2025 03:51, Retrograde wrote:
> Making a competitive browser is
> hard, and clearly requires a lot of people and a lot of time. Donations are
> fickle, nobody will pay for a browser,
Does the browser need to be changed much now?

Service providers need to provide apps, so:

  (1) they do not need to give cookie popups
  (2) they can certify and take responsibility for compatibility with 
their server-side interfaces, because the users can't (not even by 
commissioning their interaction devices with strong warranties).

So they could pay for whatever and the firefox developers don't need to 
care. The rest of us only need good-old web (if only the informative 
content still existed or could be found).

The big problem is providing for sandboxed installation at real-world 
locations, so I can get the app direct at a bank location without 
involving a 3rd party distributor who may control my activities or 
shoe-horn themselves into a stronger position against me and my 
preferred service providers.

Really, I want to go back to the 1990s game console interaction concept 
using a wallet-sized card like a cartridge. Computing declarative UI 
instructions and network messages in a credit-card format could be done 
in the 1990s. small message encryption can be done now, surely? Let me 
slot my bank card into my interaction device and get the bank app 
on-screen without it having meaningful control or access to the device 
and have my banking secure against all but infiltration of the 
interaction device.

Aren't we even reaching the point where the card has the touchscreen and 
needs only a battery and radio to be pressed against it so it can be the 
whole app? If it's not a really important app, or it's just another 
calendar and ticket buying app they can just become plugins to a 
well-generalised app anyway.

The full turing-complete app is a huge problem, amazon is presenting 
one-click buying for £2000 purchases as an up-sell on £0.00 product 
pages in a web-format where buttons jump around the screen as pages load 
and dangling USB cables click all over your screen while you sip your 
tea so something's got to give to take browsers back away from the 
trading coal-face.

--
Tristan Wibberley

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web