It is not propaganda as it is factual information. If you believe this is 4D chess from Google to manipulate us to dislike Firefox you are out of your mind. https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b61939b7f4310eb80c5470e this is an actual commit made by mozilla. It was not made by Google.

Changes include:

• Removing “we don’t sell access to your data”. Curiously this change is only for the TOU. Presumable because that is legally binding. Idk where the “else” branch is displayed though.
• Removing this question from FAQ: “Does Firefox sell your personal data? Nope. Never has, never will (…). That’s a promise”
• Remove another mention in the TOU “and we don’t sell your personal data”. That again was not removed from the “else” branch

That to me indicates one of the following:

• They have started selling data.
• They plan on selling data in the near future.
• They don’t feel confident that they can keep that promise forever. That is, they see a future where they sell data.

I don’t like either of those alternatives.

I don’t know if they are able to sell the data you mentioned. Because I’m not in the enshittification minds of giant American corporations. 20 years ago people would laugh at the idea of buying data about the screen size of a user. But now they do, and use it for fingerprinting. If recent history has shown anything is that most data has some kind of value. And giant corporations will find their way to use that data against users.

I’ve seen way too many companies that were supposed to be the cool kids and were doing everything morally enshittify. There’s no reason to believe Mozilla is going to be different. They’re showing the same signs.

You probably missed the news. But Firefox is becoming a data seller too.

Recently they updated their policies, since they are on GitHub you can see the exact changes.

One of them was the elimination of a phrase like “we won’t sell your data, and that’s a promise”. So promise broken I guess.

Your library has dedicated parking?

Your Airbnb was someone’s home.

I’m not talking about the technical possibility. Of course you can have multiple video stream, one per participant.

I’m saying that without multicast, it can be more resource intensive than having intermediate servers that can multicast on the application layer.

Is a connection between 3+ people still p2p? Or is there another term for it?

I don’t know how this would work over the internet though.

On a LAN you could use multicast, but I don’t think ISPs support multicast, it seems like it would be an easy way to DoS. But I honestly don’t know.

So, if you can’t multicast, the way to have serverless multi-user video calls would be to have a separate video feed for each receiver, which I can see using more resources than through a server that would replicate the stream to all the receivers. Of course this is dependant on distance, even without multicast it consumes more resources if everyone is in the same LAN.

I’m surprised they at least know they have a problem. I would think these companies would just say “look how the sales numbers haven’t changed, that means that we were correct in doing the AI thing. Without it, sales would be sinking into the ocean!”

And how are women pushed out of “man jobs”?

And how are we fixing that?

Is it bosses that aim to have male coworkers turning down women? How is that different than bosses wanting artificially 50/50 turning down men?

Is it not being represented in advertising? How is that different than what happens now. Where most advertising displays just women? Or if there is both a man and a woman, the woman is usually centered in the picture or doing a more important/powerful role.

By “encouraging” women in the workplace, what you see is things being done to men that you complain was done to women.

In the meantime. This is a valid business model.

Firefox is not chromium based. You can install unlock origin and have no ads.

There’s a reason just in time manufacturing took over the world. Storage is expensive.

Or. You could just pay them more. Which would be politically way easier.

Because then you can’t change your password. Since you would have to decrypt all the hard drives that use windows with that account, and then encrypt them again with the new one.

This also means that if you forget your password you are fucked.

IBM fell. Ford fell. Facebook (the social media site, not the company) fell. Yahoo fell.

Sure, they haven’t stopped existing, but their relevance is nowhere near their peak. There’s no such thing as “too big to fall”.