Explains why no matter what it will be down voted here. People simp for a company who has the majority of all profits from a company they hate, and call them legit.
But it’s okay, I kinda like the downvote game here and pissing off the extremists who baby raged on over after Reddit’s API change.
Arc is the first company actually innovating in the browser space in two decades and I’ll happily accept that work being done on top of an open-source base that Google doesn’t control that much.
open-source base that Google doesn’t control that much.
My interactions with people who work with Chromium’s code a lot, and with maintainers of open-source projects that use that code (like LineageOS), has given me a very different impression.
(The downvotes aren’t from me, though. I don’t think they’re a useful way to express disagreement.)
But it’s okay, I kinda like the downvote game here and pissing off the extremists who baby raged on over after Reddit’s API change.
Imagine being annoyed that the only way the site resembles functional in any way was taken away from you, while the CEO of the site also spews stacks of provably false lies and personal attacks at the people who actually made the site function.
And even for the crazy people that were somehow OK with the terrible desktop experience, their experience was still reliant on third party apps, because they’re the ones who made all of the modding tools necessary just to handle obvious blatant spam.
The article is about them cutting ties with the company after finding out the CEO of the partner company was doing something bad for privacy. Mozilla, as far as we know at this point, isn’t guilty of anything bad except maybe not thoroughly digging into the CEO of this other company’s past thoroughly enough. Mozilla was not profiting off of selling your data. They’re not even sure if the other company was directly using their “privacy” service to benefit the CEO’s data harvesting company, just that he had been doing data harvesting, and then started a “privacy” company to remove data from the data aggregating sites, like the exact ones he funded.
So, are you sure you’re clear on what happened? Because Mozilla rectified an oversight on their part after they discovered a partner company’s executive had ties to the exact industry they were supposed to be fighting.
Yes, and they never should have been in that position to begin with. Mozilla’s extreme lack of due diligence has lost my trust for every other service they offer. Is that so hard to understand? Or is your head so far up Mozilla’s ass that you can’t see the obvious?
lol what an insanely combative position to take. It’s a breakdown in due diligence, for sure. No argument there.
But an “extreme lack?” No, not really. It’s easy for them to overlook something like this. I’m not a corporate investigative person at all, so I don’t know the proper procedures. But checking into executive holdings and business history seems, I dunno, like something that probably isn’t done very often—if at all. Especially when that CEO is a foreign national.
Yeah, they shouldve—but that’s easy to say now that something like this has happened. The company the guy worked for was the one to uncover it—so the company that put him in charge didn’t catch it before giving him the position. So, really, it’s a breakdown on the cybersecurity outfit’s protocol, and Mozilla got dragged into this while being twice removed from it.
Look, I’m not a huge Mozilla stan or anything. I hadn’t been using Firefox for a long time, I’d been a DDG browser user, before that Brave. But, brave runs on chromium not to mention all their nonsense with crypto, so I bailed on them and went to DDG. And then recently only switched back to Firefox. So you’re barking up the wrong tree on your stupid crusade to try to paint me as someone with my head up Mozilla’s ass.
From where I stand, they happen to be one of the best browsers these days, especially for privacy. I used to have speed issues with it, which is why I bailed on it so long ago. If this information came out and they decided to stick with this company after the company failed to properly vet their CEO? Yeah, I’d be pissed. But they’re taking an extra step in cutting ties with a company they’d been doing business with for a month, after they are rectifying their own mistake.
Use Firefox, don’t use Firefox, I couldn’t give one shit less. But it just seemed like you misunderstood what happened, took a strong stance, and now are just digging your heels in. It just seems…dumb. But like I said, do whatever the fuck you want. You just kinda seem like an asshole. No offense.
Yeah just an honest broker looking for the best product right? So much so that you weren’t even willing to correctly parse the title of the article, and took it to mean the complete opposite of what it actually says.
What did I fail to understand? That Mozilla didn’t do their due diligence and went into business with this person and only dropped them after damage to their customers was already done?
Let me be clear for your simple mind: Mozilla would have caught this if they looked into their business partners, but they failed to do that. So they lost my trust.
looking for the best product
And the best browser right now is Arc, which just opened up their Windows Beta to the public.
And the best browser right now is Arc, which just opened up their Windows Beta to the public
Lol, you do realize that ending your comment with a plug for a different browser doesn’t exactly make you look like an honest broker… Just a heads up for next time.
Youre so cool and edgy.
deleted by creator
Freedom of choice… How is that edgy?
I think it was a pun. Arc is built on the same engine as Edge.
So built on chromium?
Explains why no matter what it will be down voted here. People simp for a company who has the majority of all profits from a company they hate, and call them legit.
Yep, built on Chromium.
But it’s okay, I kinda like the downvote game here and pissing off the extremists who baby raged on over after Reddit’s API change.
Arc is the first company actually innovating in the browser space in two decades and I’ll happily accept that work being done on top of an open-source base that Google doesn’t control that much.
My interactions with people who work with Chromium’s code a lot, and with maintainers of open-source projects that use that code (like LineageOS), has given me a very different impression.
(The downvotes aren’t from me, though. I don’t think they’re a useful way to express disagreement.)
Imagine being annoyed that the only way the site resembles functional in any way was taken away from you, while the CEO of the site also spews stacks of provably false lies and personal attacks at the people who actually made the site function.
And even for the crazy people that were somehow OK with the terrible desktop experience, their experience was still reliant on third party apps, because they’re the ones who made all of the modding tools necessary just to handle obvious blatant spam.
Look at this comment with -20 downvotes and tell me this place isn’t an echo chamber filled with one way to think.
https://sh.itjust.works/comment/10163765
I’ll take Reddit’s shitty practices over this place’s community.
Because Reddit isn’t an echo chamber.
Reddit doesn’t just have shitty practices. It is no longer functional to anything resembling an acceptable level.
Am I? For ditching a product that sold out my personal info by using a paid-for service designed to protect my privacy?
I gave Mozilla their chance and they pulled this shit.
The article is about them cutting ties with the company after finding out the CEO of the partner company was doing something bad for privacy. Mozilla, as far as we know at this point, isn’t guilty of anything bad except maybe not thoroughly digging into the CEO of this other company’s past thoroughly enough. Mozilla was not profiting off of selling your data. They’re not even sure if the other company was directly using their “privacy” service to benefit the CEO’s data harvesting company, just that he had been doing data harvesting, and then started a “privacy” company to remove data from the data aggregating sites, like the exact ones he funded.
So, are you sure you’re clear on what happened? Because Mozilla rectified an oversight on their part after they discovered a partner company’s executive had ties to the exact industry they were supposed to be fighting.
Yes, and they never should have been in that position to begin with. Mozilla’s extreme lack of due diligence has lost my trust for every other service they offer. Is that so hard to understand? Or is your head so far up Mozilla’s ass that you can’t see the obvious?
lol what an insanely combative position to take. It’s a breakdown in due diligence, for sure. No argument there.
But an “extreme lack?” No, not really. It’s easy for them to overlook something like this. I’m not a corporate investigative person at all, so I don’t know the proper procedures. But checking into executive holdings and business history seems, I dunno, like something that probably isn’t done very often—if at all. Especially when that CEO is a foreign national.
Yeah, they shouldve—but that’s easy to say now that something like this has happened. The company the guy worked for was the one to uncover it—so the company that put him in charge didn’t catch it before giving him the position. So, really, it’s a breakdown on the cybersecurity outfit’s protocol, and Mozilla got dragged into this while being twice removed from it.
Look, I’m not a huge Mozilla stan or anything. I hadn’t been using Firefox for a long time, I’d been a DDG browser user, before that Brave. But, brave runs on chromium not to mention all their nonsense with crypto, so I bailed on them and went to DDG. And then recently only switched back to Firefox. So you’re barking up the wrong tree on your stupid crusade to try to paint me as someone with my head up Mozilla’s ass.
From where I stand, they happen to be one of the best browsers these days, especially for privacy. I used to have speed issues with it, which is why I bailed on it so long ago. If this information came out and they decided to stick with this company after the company failed to properly vet their CEO? Yeah, I’d be pissed. But they’re taking an extra step in cutting ties with a company they’d been doing business with for a month, after they are rectifying their own mistake.
Use Firefox, don’t use Firefox, I couldn’t give one shit less. But it just seemed like you misunderstood what happened, took a strong stance, and now are just digging your heels in. It just seems…dumb. But like I said, do whatever the fuck you want. You just kinda seem like an asshole. No offense.
Yeah just an honest broker looking for the best product right? So much so that you weren’t even willing to correctly parse the title of the article, and took it to mean the complete opposite of what it actually says.
Right.
What did I fail to understand? That Mozilla didn’t do their due diligence and went into business with this person and only dropped them after damage to their customers was already done?
Let me be clear for your simple mind: Mozilla would have caught this if they looked into their business partners, but they failed to do that. So they lost my trust.
And the best browser right now is Arc, which just opened up their Windows Beta to the public.
What damage? You’re all over this thread asserting something that doesn’t seem to have happened.
Lol, you do realize that ending your comment with a plug for a different browser doesn’t exactly make you look like an honest broker… Just a heads up for next time.