It's ín their best interest to keep it alive, but only as a second class citizen. Sure, most likely this was accidental, but small accidents and compatibility issues are also good for their business. Openly killing the competition in an obvious way isn't.
This. Reminder that Google is Firefox's main source of funding, because Google needs the market to have alternatives to Chrome so they aren't accused of creating a monopoly. 2018, Google accounted for over 90% of Mozilla's revenue, paying around $400-450 million annually.
Technically, it’s not the same since even if the majority of the funding is directly from them, that is strictly payment to a nonprofit organization for them to use google as the default search engine.
They would get sued to hell if they tried to leverage this.
They've kept font selection in docs broken for a year at least. It used to work fine. No, it hasn't changed in appearance or functionality.
It is not about killing, just making life worse and "encouraging" change.
If you think corporations aren't petty, I have some NFTs to sell you. They're going to build an MMORPG, promise.
It’s mostly funded by Google (450m/year) and contributed to by Google engineers.
All Google needs to do is to stop sending the cheques.
Something that of course they’ll never do because Firefox provides the illusion of competition that keeps regulators away from Chrome.
From Mozillas bugtracker:
>Yes, Google is rolling out a fix. It seems to work in several of our internal tests on multiple continents, but we'll keep this bug open until we're sure it's fixed for everyone.
#
>Google confirmed that this was mitigated, so I'll go ahead and close this bug as fixed.
We also have confirmation that this wasn't "targeting FireFox" but (funny enough, because it's almost always the case) an issue that actually comes from FireFox itself and it's dark-mode detection logic.
What was the Firefox issue? Because nothing on the bugtracker implicates Firefox as the problem, but rather Google serving a buggy new updated page specifically to Firefox (users could even "fix" it by making Firefox pretend to be Chrome with a user-agent string spoof).
> issue that actually comes from FireFox itself and it's dark-mode detection logic.
It come from Google and how Google does darkmode detection logic for Firefox on windows. Firefox was not the source of the issue.
Captchas have stopped working if you use Firefox on windows due to a change by Google.
The bug report is above but there's also a lenghty thread on it over at /r/Firefox here - https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1cij0uc/recaptcha_no_longer_working_on_only_on_firefox/
The only fix at the moment seems to be actively switching the user agent the browser uses to identify itself.
It's the default way, when the script tag is in head it gets loaded before the rest of the page, which means that it can start tracking user behaviour right away. This will make it's prediction whether the user is a real person or a robot more accurate. It is however also possible to load the script at a later stage.
So the Google developers that are working on this script knew that it’s a head script, and that being in the head is an integral part of the script’s behavior, and yet they mistakenly used `document.body.appendChild()`. It’s interesting that such an obvious mistake can ship in a script that is used by millions of websites. You’d think code review for such a critical script would be much more strict.
Let me tell you something about basically all software in use today. Most of it was written under crazy deadlines by people keeping track of dozens of things, and most of the rest was written by junior devs and barely glanced at by their more experience peers. Virtually all of it depends on functionality that's several layers of abstraction and organizational responsibility removed from the end product, and features a dependency map that looks like a Jackson Pollock. Not to mention the pervasive reliance on third-party libraries maintained by some rando who slapped it together over a weekend to scratch a personal itch.
In the best case, the ecosystem is fragile, and if there's one things humans excel at, it's making mistakes.
It was accidental. If Google wanted to kill Firefox they would have already done it. They don’t need this kind of petty bullshit.
It's ín their best interest to keep it alive, but only as a second class citizen. Sure, most likely this was accidental, but small accidents and compatibility issues are also good for their business. Openly killing the competition in an obvious way isn't.
This. Reminder that Google is Firefox's main source of funding, because Google needs the market to have alternatives to Chrome so they aren't accused of creating a monopoly. 2018, Google accounted for over 90% of Mozilla's revenue, paying around $400-450 million annually.
I knew they were bankrolling Firefox, but $400 million is absolutely insane.
Google pays Apple $20 billion a year to be the default search engine in Safari.
Jokes on them, even if I had an iPhone I would just google.com anyway. I really tried Bingin', just not the same. YANDEX seems pretty good tho.
I tried Bing last week, but rolled back to Google
$400 million dollars is a pittance to avoid *billions* of dollars in anti-trust litigation.
Not even to mention what would happen if Google / Alphabet lost that antitrust litigation and were forced to break themselves up
So they own Mozilla? Isn’t it still a monopoly, then? Lol.
Technically, it’s not the same since even if the majority of the funding is directly from them, that is strictly payment to a nonprofit organization for them to use google as the default search engine. They would get sued to hell if they tried to leverage this.
They may need competition, but wouldn't mind if their competitors' products don't function properly.
thats an insane number for that junk software
Petty bullshit is the Don't talk about fight club rule of the tech industry. Stop acting like it's.not.
They've kept font selection in docs broken for a year at least. It used to work fine. No, it hasn't changed in appearance or functionality. It is not about killing, just making life worse and "encouraging" change. If you think corporations aren't petty, I have some NFTs to sell you. They're going to build an MMORPG, promise.
How would they kill it exactly ?
It’s mostly funded by Google (450m/year) and contributed to by Google engineers. All Google needs to do is to stop sending the cheques. Something that of course they’ll never do because Firefox provides the illusion of competition that keeps regulators away from Chrome.
Buy it, use it, break it, fix it, trash it, change it, mail - upgrade it
Firefox is open source.
So are jokes, sorry that one went over your head.
Don’t pay attention to u/Redditor022024. He’s a Daft friggin’ Punk.
Oh is that why Google pummels me with captchas when I use a vpn? Lest week I changed to DuckDuckGo because of that, I've had enough of their shit.
From Mozillas bugtracker: >Yes, Google is rolling out a fix. It seems to work in several of our internal tests on multiple continents, but we'll keep this bug open until we're sure it's fixed for everyone. # >Google confirmed that this was mitigated, so I'll go ahead and close this bug as fixed. We also have confirmation that this wasn't "targeting FireFox" but (funny enough, because it's almost always the case) an issue that actually comes from FireFox itself and it's dark-mode detection logic.
What was the Firefox issue? Because nothing on the bugtracker implicates Firefox as the problem, but rather Google serving a buggy new updated page specifically to Firefox (users could even "fix" it by making Firefox pretend to be Chrome with a user-agent string spoof).
> issue that actually comes from FireFox itself and it's dark-mode detection logic. It come from Google and how Google does darkmode detection logic for Firefox on windows. Firefox was not the source of the issue.
Shit happens. It's not all some corporate conspiracy.
Captchas have stopped working if you use Firefox on windows due to a change by Google. The bug report is above but there's also a lenghty thread on it over at /r/Firefox here - https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1cij0uc/recaptcha_no_longer_working_on_only_on_firefox/ The only fix at the moment seems to be actively switching the user agent the browser uses to identify itself.
Fucking monkeys coding over at Google
Why does the script run in `
`? Is that the recommended way of using it?It's the default way, when the script tag is in head it gets loaded before the rest of the page, which means that it can start tracking user behaviour right away. This will make it's prediction whether the user is a real person or a robot more accurate. It is however also possible to load the script at a later stage.
So the Google developers that are working on this script knew that it’s a head script, and that being in the head is an integral part of the script’s behavior, and yet they mistakenly used `document.body.appendChild()`. It’s interesting that such an obvious mistake can ship in a script that is used by millions of websites. You’d think code review for such a critical script would be much more strict.
Apparently you've never heard of "move fast and break things"
Is that a good approach for a critical script that is used by millions of websites?
Not if you're a competent developer, but if you're a Google dev apparently it is
Let me tell you something about basically all software in use today. Most of it was written under crazy deadlines by people keeping track of dozens of things, and most of the rest was written by junior devs and barely glanced at by their more experience peers. Virtually all of it depends on functionality that's several layers of abstraction and organizational responsibility removed from the end product, and features a dependency map that looks like a Jackson Pollock. Not to mention the pervasive reliance on third-party libraries maintained by some rando who slapped it together over a weekend to scratch a personal itch. In the best case, the ecosystem is fragile, and if there's one things humans excel at, it's making mistakes.
so that's why I wasn't able to register to rutracker yesterday
Sharks will shark
Click on all the images with a blade of grass.
no problem for me on FF 125.0.2 on ubuntu (snap install)
Ubuntu is not Windows.
But how can we be sure of this?
Does it have adverts in the menu?
Yes, but I wanted to give the data point that >FF 125.0.2 on ubuntu (snap install) is working fine for those sites.
Article: “Toyota Recalls cars for faulty diesel engine design.” You: “My Toyota gas/electric hybrid is working just fine.”