The answer to “what is Firefox?” on Mozilla’s FAQ page about its browser used to read:
The Firefox Browser is the only major browser backed by a not-for-profit that doesn’t sell your personal data to advertisers while helping you protect your personal information.
Now it just says:
The Firefox Browser, the only major browser backed by a not-for-profit, helps you protect your personal information.
In other words, Mozilla is no longer willing to commit to not selling your personal data to advertisers.
A related change was also highlighted by mozilla.org commenter jkaelin, who linked direct to the source code for that FAQ page. To answer the question, “is Firefox free?” Moz used to say:
Yep! The Firefox Browser is free. Super free, actually. No hidden costs or anything. You don’t pay anything to use it, and we don’t sell your personal data.
Now it simply reads:
Yep! The Firefox Browser is free. Super free, actually. No hidden costs or anything. You don’t pay anything to use it.
Again, a pledge to not sell people’s data has disappeared. Varma insisted this is the result of the fluid definition of “sell” in the context of data sharing and privacy.
Ladybird looks promising.
Depends on where you stand on misogyny and transphobia.
I feel out of the loop on this one. Is there a particular individual on the project that this is about, or is this a company policy issue?
There is a link on another FF post to GitHub where someone changed “he” to “they” in the documentation. All references to a user being able to do anything in the documentation only uses “He”.
The main dev told them to “keep their politics to themselves” and refused the fix.
In which context? If it was referring to a man I get why he’d say that answer
Parent comment says “a user.” Reading the docs, it clearly wasn’t referring to a man, but any user, as in “the average Lemmy user interacts with many instances, and they have the option to block those they’re not interested in.”
I think that’s a pretty cheap PR. Ideally it should be rewritten to not to use pronouns. The PR is low effort and feels like it was deliberately done for attention.
And?
Why? Linux kernel docs use pronouns and they, and they’re fine. What’s so special about Klingland that they need to keep pronouns out?
Have you ever seen the piles of “good first issue” tags on github? Most newcomers start with simple changes, and documentation improvements are high up in being a user’s first contribution. Do you have anything that suggests the person behind the PR had such intentions, beyond you thinking it’s low effort?
Essentially, someone submitted a PR on GitHub changing a “he” in the build instructions to a gender-neutral “they”, to which the main dev of Ladybird (Andreas Kling) replied:
This next part’s just my opinion; that’s an insane response to someone suggesting neutral language. As a non-binary person, I wouldn’t feel comfortable around this person after such a reply, and I certainly wouldn’t donate to Ladybird or anything of the sort.
That being said, we all likely use tons of software developed by people way worse than Kling. As long as it’s FOSS and is privacy-respecting, I’ll run code that’s been written by bigots. However I definitely won’t support them by recommending their software to others, or by donating time or money to the project.
I don’t think that’s just opinion anymore, it’s a fairly accurate analysis. Countless serious projects use pronouns and “they,” and that’s fine, but for these few specific groups they’re somehow political and a bad thing.
I’ve heard Andreas’ twitter likes were telling, before those went private, but that information’s out of reach now. That said, I’ve seen the people who frequently interact with him there, and I wouldn’t feel comfortable around them either. He seems to really like it, though. Make of that what you will.
Still, good point on the reality of “moral software use.” For all its issues, I do hope Ladybird succeeds as a new browser engine because the internet needs more of those. I’m just not touching it unless they get their shit sorted.
Honestly it seems blown way out of proportion. You are leaving out the part where he said he thinks that they sounds weird. I believe he is still open to rewriting the docs to not use pronouns at all
That doesn’t help. Also, his main reason remains “keep politics out of my project,” completely missing the point that his stance is also political. It’s the old “my politics aren’t political because they’re normal.”
That’s even more political, and ridiculously so. Linux kernel docs refer to users as “they.” Should they change it? Are they bringing in unnecessary politics into the sanctity of one of the world’s greatest collaborative technical projects? Are they too fucking woke?
Documentation shouldn’t have pronouns since that’s the wrong tone
I think the dev probably just hasn’t been exposed much to transgender people. Reacting with hate immediately doesn’t help at all.
You’re not even moving the goalposts, you’re dancing with them.
I give you pointed arguments, you ignore them, then give me unrelated nonsense.
What do you mean wrong tone? Pronouns are in everyday conversation, in companies’ documents and in the government’s too. I’m reiterating to you, @Possibly linux, that they’re in Linux Kernel documentation. Better call Torvalds and tell him to fix that tone. The singular they has been in use for over half a millenium, and is now used by so many people and institutions, it’d actually be easier to list those who refuse to use them.
I’ve seen folks calmly and respectfully explain to him what’s wrong, but he just doubles down. Now we say, “maybe don’t use that guy’s software,” and people like you come out of hiding to defend him. Clearly, any hate that may have been is gone—it’s just snowflakes scared of pronouns, all the way down.
I think it is overblown
Also we don’t exactly have a lot of options