this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
1062 points (85.2% liked)

Firefox

17875 readers
6 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] raven@hexbear.net 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you talking about the ex-CEO who got BTFO for being homophobic? Because that was based and cool, actually.

[–] KickMe@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] raven@hexbear.net 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The "precise and specific actions" called for in that article, specifically for the purpose of combating speech that encourages violence, like homophobia or white supremacy:

  • Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.

  • Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.

  • Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.

  • Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.

What's your problem here?

[–] KickMe@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.

This, because it's a fucking web browser, and it can be weaponized for bad while pretending to be good.

[–] raven@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The article is about social media.

[–] KickMe@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why can't a browser company just be opinionated about making the best browser? Why does it have to have a shitty controversial opinion about social media? I don't know why, but my trust in the org and therefore the browser itself is gone.

[–] raven@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't think being anti white supremacy and homophobia is shitty or controversial. Why would an Internet company write an article about something that affects the biggest sector of the Internet, social media? 🤔
"No they should stay in their lane and only talk about, I don't know, CSS or something." I don't buy it.

[–] KickMe@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who said anything about white supremacy or homophobia?

Regardless, yes, they should refrain from controversial subjects that are not related to their business. And if they decide to make social media censorship their business in a direct way, also fuck em.

[–] raven@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

...the article you linked me? The topic of this discussion?

It shouldn't be controversial to anyone. The suggestions given there are pretty mild. Regardless, justice is not the absence of conflict. Sorry the article made you upset but that doesn't make it wrong.

[–] KickMe@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't give a damn about the article. I only stated my reasons why Firefox and Chrome are total deal breakers for me. Maybe there's a better browser than all of them, but for now I'm happy with Brave.

And your opinion is your opinion, it isn't universal. Stop thinking that it is.

[–] raven@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The opinion:
"Homophobia and white supremacy are bad and should be combated"

It's interesting that you think firefox is being "controversial" when their CEO writes a couple paragraphs about combating hate speech online, but brave isn't when their CEO sends money to hate organizations. 🤔

If the user share of Firefox falls too low websites will stop supporting it (which is already happening), we will have given google the internet. Everything that is not Firefox is based on Chrome.