• electricprism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    7 months ago

    How is Mozilla literally not controlled opposition? Their main source of income used to be Google.

    How are they not just a antitrust prop so Google doesn’t get split up by the EU.

      • electricprism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The echo chamber is strong. I am a big popularizer of that phrase for at least 2 years now. Agreed. Still the questions had to be asked to keep the concern alive.

    • mino@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Does such an angle exist from the google perspective? Probably.

      Is it ‘just’ this and nothing else, I’d argue no.

      Matters tend to be more complex than simple black and white statements.

      I for one think Mozilla is one of the most visible actors with regards to privacy promoting thought and FOSS, with widespread ‘mainstream’ reach. If it wasn’t for Firefox I’d have to use chromium for instance, and that would make the world a sadder day.

      I do agree that funding from google is an obvious conflict of interest and probably influences policy in a way not a 100% aligned with humanitarian goals. This is definitely less than ideal and I think everybody involved on this side of the fence would like to see that change. Maybe you could help them with that?

    • kbal@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      If Mozilla is just a convenient prop for Google, then you and I are are just convenient sources of data to be fed into the machine for Google.

    • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      My sibling in Christ you commented this on a post about Mozilla going against what Google said. If Mozilla was a puppet this article would not have been written.

          • Zerush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            Mozilla has signed a contract with the devil, this is their problem. Although Mozilla is very privacy focused, its movement is limited to what Google allows. It is always a problem when a company depends on external investors, since they have a say in the decisions it may have. They may object to accepting FloC or other Google mechanisms, because Google does not require them to do so, because it already has its googleanalytics and googletagmanager built into Mozilla with which they obtain their data. I only hope that Mozilla manages to free itself from this contract this year, as it has announced, because only then will it have a free hand to be truly private.

    • Zerush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s only a problem in browsers which log the user activity, also if the user use Google for searches.

      • electricprism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Partially yes, the other concern would be who does the DNS lookups? In my opinion there should be no DNS monopoly so there is no single point of failure if captured.

        The entire concept of DNS is predicated on decentralization too.

        • Zerush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          There are dozends of DNS providers, there isn’t a monopoly. Eg I mostly use Quad9, because is one of the fastes and reliables, apart nothing to do with Google.