Mozilla has 1.4 BILLION dollars that they are spending on some AI bullshit.
Uncategorized
66
Posts
54
Posters
1
Views
-
@oblomov @cstross @jwz Consider that Mozilla being cooked has a few decades of history.
Back around 2007ish, I was working with a few folk who either came from or later went to Mozilla. Anyhow, some of them were involved with the XHTML 2.0 spec.
Which was finished.
But then got ditched.
Because Googleites insisted a "living spec" was the right thing, which can only be implemented by whoever throws the most money at it, and we now have HTML5 and a browser engine monopoly.
And Mozilla?
-
Mozilla has 1.4 BILLION dollars that they are spending on some AI bullshit.
That's billion with a B. So if you held out hope that filling out surveys or shitposting through it might turn this ship around, no. That much money has an event horizon.
Mozilla is cooked.
@jwz Why is this tagged brand necrophilia?
Weird ass stuff man
-
@oblomov @cstross @jwz Consider that Mozilla being cooked has a few decades of history.
Back around 2007ish, I was working with a few folk who either came from or later went to Mozilla. Anyhow, some of them were involved with the XHTML 2.0 spec.
Which was finished.
But then got ditched.
Because Googleites insisted a "living spec" was the right thing, which can only be implemented by whoever throws the most money at it, and we now have HTML5 and a browser engine monopoly.
And Mozilla?
-
@jwz It feels like someone needs to pull a Firefox on the Mozilla Foundation like Firefox did on the original Mozilla browser when it had lost its way.
Take the core technology of Firefox & fork a non-AI browser that is focused on the web. That's what a large swath of people want. Then let the downloads do the talking.
Firefox "won" because a lot of people were using it. Web developers loved it.
Make a browser that people fall in love with because it works and is fast & reliable without AI.
-
IIRC the WHATWG was set up before Google had its own browser (I think it was Mozilla + Opera + Apple at the time?) and it almost made sense, although there was no reason to ditch XHTML 2.0 altogether. What really drives me mad is that EVEN IF one could consider the XEvent and XForms interface to be suboptimal for the kind of “dynamic” web that was being pushed (possibly by Google behind the scenes) that was really no reason to throw away the whole of XHTML 2.
-
IIRC the WHATWG was set up before Google had its own browser (I think it was Mozilla + Opera + Apple at the time?) and it almost made sense, although there was no reason to ditch XHTML 2.0 altogether. What really drives me mad is that EVEN IF one could consider the XEvent and XForms interface to be suboptimal for the kind of “dynamic” web that was being pushed (possibly by Google behind the scenes) that was really no reason to throw away the whole of XHTML 2.
There are still so many features that had been introduced there (client-side includes with fallback, “everything is a link”, etc) that are still sorely missing 8-(
I wonder if there was also a growing dislike for XML in general behind this choice? (hurr durr namespace confusing). It's ironic that we have to thank MS for pushing for the little support of XML in browsers we still have (and they are now working on removing 8-/).
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@aeva eh, don't feel like causing drama. Though that being said the person who sent the cease and desist might, so we'll see if she decides to start more drama.
-
Anche a dicembre, come a novembre, calano i disoccupati ma aumentano gli inattivi. Questo concorre alla riduzione del tasso di disoccupazione. Attenzione alle illusioni ottiche, quindi.
(In calo anche il tasso di occupazione, se interessa)
https://www.istat.it/comunicato-stampa/occupati-e-disoccupati-dati-provvisori-dicembre-2025/
-
@lasolitaLaura_ a volte mi chiedo perché sia così tanto passata la moda di mettere adesivi sulle auto: in quelle situazioni aiutano non poco :)
-
Vous êtes été magnifiques https://viacabane.wordpress.com/2019/09/23/vous-etes-ete-magnifiques/
-
Come fai a dire che le assicurazioni non ne trarrebbero profitto, mica lavorano gratis.
E i fondi non devono essere per forza parcheggiati, credo che lo stato i soldi accantonati li faccia fruttare in qualche modo.
-
@macfranc la mia grande azienda aveva una quantità di palazzi di proprietà, prima che Marco Trochetti Provera "casualmente" li spostò a Pirelli RE. Adesso non ha praticamente nulla, e col lavoro agile risparmierebbe.
Ma il bello è che il nostro gruppo ha il capetto a Torino, e siamo in tanti non poter comunque essere controllati in presenza...
-
"L'essere umano è l'unico animale che ha bisogno di un padrone per vivere"
-
@max @martellum le assicurazioni non ne trarrebbero profitto, ma il costo ci sarebbe ugualmente, anzi sarebbe maggiore nella sua globalità. La gestione ha un costo, che paghi con le tasse, e con mancati investimenti lasciando i fondi parcheggiati.
Ciò non toglie che il governo dovrebbe assumersi le sue responsabilità (perché si muove dopo il danno, di cui è complice?), né è corretto obbligare tutti da un giorno con l'altro a farsi una polizza.
