Signal had 40 million active users in 2021. With 14 million in infra cost, that comes to .35 per user/year. Total expenses are about 33 million, so about .825 per user/year. All in all that seems very reasonable.
I'm very excited about how the Linux community generally seems to be moving towards various approaches to immutable systems - all of them having in common that system updates are going to be a lot less likely to break. The future is looking good!
The GNOME Foundation is thrilled to announce the GNOME project is receiving €1M from the Sovereign Tech Fund to modernize the platform, improve tooling and accessibility, and support features that are in the public interest....
Great work by Sonny and Tobias. Really happy to hear that more effort will be invested into accessibility, as I feel it's really been lagging over the past couple of years.
Use Tor Browser if you want it dialed up to eleven. You'll quickly find that it's way more of a hassle to use, and also still pretty easy to accidentally compromise the security measures.
Of course Firefox isn't perfect; nothing is. But a 180 turn implies it's the opposite of perfect now, and it really isn't - especially in a world where basically every other browser is waaaay closer to that.
But also keep in mind that it couldn't exist without Firefox/Mozilla existing. A world in which more people use Firefox over Chromium-based browsers is a better world.
A Mozilla dependent on Google seeing value in Firefox sending searches their way is at minimum as good as one in which Mozilla doesn't exist and everybody uses Chromium-based browsers, by definition - and in practice, way better.
But yes, more non-Blink engines in use in general would also be a better world. Alas, that, too, isn't the world we live in.
I mean, you're just saying that if you don't dial it up to eleven, but just to nine, then you'll hit less breakage. Which, sure, but that's kinda my point: a usable browser needs to strike a balance, and that's exactly what Firefox is trying to do - which is really something different from "needing a 180-degree turn". Firefox by default is stopping way more tracking than e.g. Chrome, and guides users to installing e.g. uBO.
Also note that most breakage isn't immediately obvious. For example, if you turn on privacy.resistFingerprinting, then Google Docs will become blurred. However, by the time you see that, you won't be able to link that to the flipped config. This is the kind of breakage that many "hardening guides" cause, and by that, they eventually lead people to switch to Chrome, which is the opposite of what they're supposed to achieve.
And sure, Librewolf draws the line at a slightly different place than Firefox does. But the main difference is not sending data like hardware capabilities, crash stats, etc. to Mozilla - which don't threaten democracy or result in hyper-targeted ads, but do enable Mozilla to optimise the code for real-world use.
Yes, but as soon as it is accessible via the GUI, more and more people will start getting blurred Google Docs (and similar weird issues) without knowing how that happened - because that's already happening even with people who know enough to make changes in about:config.
Ah yes, people are indeed known for always reading long readmes and fully grasping the consequences of their actions, especially if those occur long after said actions :P
This is so rude. You've done nothing for the guy (neither have I), and have probably used and benefited from his work (that we did not pay for) in some way - and then to single him out and ridicule him? There's an actual human on the other side there...
Legit one of the most underrated Firefox features that I use all the time: right-click -> Take Screenshot (or Ctrl+Shift+S). No need to look up the relevant node, just hover the relevant part with your cursor.
You don't even need to open Responsive Design Mode - when you select Take Screenshot, there are two buttons "Save visible" and "Save full page" in the top right-hand corner.
Well, there's a way to frame this as malicious. I'm not a fan of Brave, but it also installs, say, a spell checker without consent, or a Tor client. Sure, the code is there even if you don't use it, but... What's the actual harm?
I mean, yes, it could've been differently, and as I understand it they're going to. But as a user, how is your life worse with this than without this? What's the impact of something being installed but not running?
It's linked to your account. If you view YouTube without logging in, you should have no issues. You can use the Multi-Account Containers extension to log in selectively per tab, if you need to.
Signal details costs of keeping its private messaging service alive | TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)
Canonical lifts lid on more Ubuntu Core Desktop details (www.theregister.com)
GNOME Recognized as Public Interest Infrastructure (foundation.gnome.org)
The GNOME Foundation is thrilled to announce the GNOME project is receiving €1M from the Sovereign Tech Fund to modernize the platform, improve tooling and accessibility, and support features that are in the public interest....
Firefox needs a 180° turn to full privacy out of the box. - Feddit (feddit.de)
Why are gnome devs like this? (sh.itjust.works)
deleted_by_author
Brave appears to install VPN Services without user consent (www.ghacks.net)
Are any of these (firefox) extensions causing the 'Adblockers are not allowed on Youtube' message for you guys?
Figured I’d make a dedicated post this time instead of leaving it in a comment....