●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed
Forgot your password?
Close
Post
Load All Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
| Reply
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
byDan East ( 318230 ) writes:
This could the end of Mozilla. Sounds like a make or break type investment for a non-profit.
Reply to This
twitter
facebook
Flag as Inappropriate
byAnonymous Coward writes:
Stop the wokeness to end the the brokeness.
byUsuallyReasonable ( 2715457 ) writes:
And now I see you beat me to it. Well done.
bygreytree ( 7124971 ) writes:
Stop ?!
No, they are empowering their agency using their diversity to decolonize the AI space dominated by cis-imperia...
Okay, they're fucked.
byAnonymous Coward writes:
Not likely to happen. They are now completely into the LGBTQIA2SMAP+ activism, and haven't been about browsers for a while. For an organization like that to brand itself as a champion of "safety" is pretty rich, given their opposition to parental control of whether their minor kids are taught all that perverted sex fiction instead of the usual disciplines
byUn-Thesis ( 700342 ) writes:
O my God!
LGBTQIA2SMAP is an ACTUAL ACRONYM!! I thought you were being sarcastically humorous!!!
https://www.queeringthemap.com... [queeringthemap.com]
byFudRucker ( 866063 ) writes:
Yup, Rebel Alliance sounds like a blackhole money pit that money goes to disappear, only a secretive insider abscondes with it
bySoftwareArtist ( 1472499 ) writes:
That's not how venture funds work. The company managing the fund (Mozilla in this case) doesn't invest their own money. They find investors who want to participate, and get a share in all the companies they invest in as payment for organizing everything.
bywill4 ( 7250692 ) writes:
Mozilla has wasted 25+ years of just going along with whatever new complexities are heaped on top HTML, JS, CSS, and HTTP instead of pushing for replacement standards of the core layout, styling and programming part of the web.
They pushed back on micro-features and pushed for browser standards without addressing the large problems with a 30 year old set of legacy standards.
byAmiMoJo ( 196126 ) writes:
Have they identified any reason why people would actually want AI in the browser yet?
I could ask it to go shopping for me, but I wouldn't trust it to find good deals. I could ask for a page summary, but I wouldn't trust it to be accurate.
byPaul Fernhout ( 109597 ) writes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
"The project proposal was to "pursue the goal of building a complete, standalone operating system for the open web" in order to "find the gaps that keep web developers from being able to build apps that are - in every way - the equals of native apps built for the iPhone, Android, and Windows Phone 7." ... In 2012, Andreas Gal expanded on Mozilla's aims. He characterized the current set of mobile operating systems as "walled gardens" and presented Firefox OS as more accessibl
bybussdriver ( 620565 ) writes:
Every time I look at contributing in some way it's a big turn off and I stop. They seem like they don't have a clue about their community or volunteers. Upsetting IT people and influencers is bad policy - I personally used to bring them 100s of users and that has greatly weakened; but I could actively steer those users away all by myself. Dismissing power users hurts them. Many many examples-- such as killing off config options we use to get around whatever BS they want to push onto us. Making the thing
byPaul Fernhout ( 109597 ) writes:
Your words to Mozilla's CEO's ears! Thanks for the reply.
All great ideas -- and most (especially on customizability and supporting power users) are ones people on Slashdot have been suggesting for a long time, sigh.
Perhaps the most problematical decision Mozilla made was looking at the user base and deciding that if most people did not use a feature they could drop it, which ignores as you say the advocacy by the power users. A long time ago I read how scriptable applications typically have a user base of a
bybussdriver ( 620565 ) writes:
yup.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...