Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mozilla Announces "Open Web Docs" Following Last Year's Layoffs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    you are confusing socialism with democracy. socialism forbids private means of production. i.e. under socialism you can write program only on socially owned computer
    when the means of production distribution in exchange of something I controlled by the people, permission is controlled by the people. now permission has to be granted by majority or does not reflect the will of the people.

    therefore the people control whether something is or is not built, or distributed. meaning something cannot be built without the permission of the people. which means the people, or the majority which reflects the will of the people can say. no you cannot build that unless you do what we the majority want you to.

    this is something absolutely fundamental in socialism. because of this the majority dictates everything. you cannot work unless you abide by the will of the majority, because if not the majority will prohibit the means of production and the means of exchange from you. and when you cannot partake in exchange, you cannot gain.

    Comment


    • #22
      The left doesn't make libre software they only want stuff for "free". They don't care about software freedom they just want control it and subvert it.

      See how they support government monopolies like goolag fazebook,etc that censor people.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Quackdoc View Post
        this is something absolutely fundamental in socialism. because of this the majority dictates everything.
        you are still confusing socialism with democracy. in democracy majority dictates everything. in socialism you can't have private means of production. and btw average socialist country is not democracy, but controlled by terrorist gang who dictates everything
        Last edited by pal666; 25 January 2021, 07:33 PM.

        Comment


        • #24
          After Brendan Eich was fired from Mozilla and Baker took over Mozilla went downhill.

          The thing is not about communism or anything, but when your political positions (or if you are PC or not) become more important than your technical expertise for a project. Good things won't happen.

          Many projects are putting social justice or your political positions above the thing that really matters: the quality of the software. Mozilla is one of those projects, Baker used Brendan's conservative political position to embarrass him, forcing his resignation. I would never donate a penny to Baker's Mozilla
          Last edited by evasb; 25 January 2021, 07:37 PM.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by kvuj View Post

            But socialism is social ownership of the means of production. Not anarchy.

            From wikipedia:


            Taking control of such means automatically requires being able to modify the source code to your liking.


            Unless I'm misunderstanding the situation, in which case please correct me. I'd rather bend my pride and learn instead of being a proud idiot.
            when the masses control the means of production, they control the production, for you cannot produce without their approval. The absence of socialism doesn't make for anarchy. FLOSS is much better described by the merits of capitalism. because only in capitalism can someone produce what they want, how they want, and using what they want, and then determine who gets to use said product. where as in socialism all that is controlled by the masses.

            You can bend the code to your liking, but only if you get approval by the masses. as your end product, is still a product in it's own right, it is subject to the peoples will, If they, the majority don't like it, they prohibit your use of the computer to make said product. If they do like it, They the majority, decide who gets to use it.

            One highly believable example would be guns.

            1. You may have an idea to make a personal defense gun, However the majority can say, they don't like it, therefore you are not allowed to use the publically owned tools (which under a socialist government is all tools) to make said product.

            2. They like the idea, however you must make it using foambags instead of rubber bullets. therefore you must make it using foambags or they will block means of production.

            3. They like the idea, but they don't like every dick and jane owning it, only the police. therefore you are allowed the means of production. however means of exchange are restricted to only police.

            This apply for absolutely everything. now imagine they do it with something like a powerful AI. and "the people" are as "Patriotic" as the average "pure blood Chinese"... Now imagine you are Uyghur.

            this is why sociallism is a very slippery slope. and why most actual socialist states become totalitarian regimes

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by pal666 View Post
              you are still confusing socialism with democracy. in democracy majority dictates everything. in socialism you can't have private means of production. and btw average socialist country is not democracy, but controlled by terrorist gang who dictates everything
              If you cannot have private ownership, you have to have public ownership, which means the people own it. IF the people own it. it is a majority rule. If it isn't majority rule, the People DO NOT own it. (In which case it becomes something worse like communism)

              Comment


              • #27
                First commit was Sep 15, 2020

                https://github.com/mdn/content/commi...79&branch=main

                so i guess this is just a funding change. Past time google/apple stepped up (microsoft web api was always ok)

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                  In 2018 she received a total of $2,458,350 in compensation from Mozilla, which represents a 400% payrise since 2008
                  This is so depressing...

                  Forking does sound like a good way to filter out these sorts of people, parasites as you rightly said. Forking such a project as Firefox will undoubtedly take considerable effort. I think it's doable though, if core developers unite and manage to find another way to organize themselves and secure an income. Just look at projects like MariaDB and NextCloud, they became better than the respective original projects. Maybe the same formula can be repeated for Firefox.

                  Mozilla also has issues with ehm... what should we call them.. left-leaning ideologues? I wouldn't call myself right-wing as I disagree with a lot of the politics coming out of both the right and the left, I just do not see WHY Bernard Eich (creator of JS and Brave) got kicked out of Mozilla. What they did seems quite extreme and it shows how deeply certain political ideas have gone unchecked and penetrated into the organization. I personally cannot with a good conscious financially support an organization that seeks to promote far-left ideas and choke all of us who just wanted to escape from Google et.al. We got a breath of fresh air from Firefox and Mozilla, we still do, but it feels like it's a matter of time before it starts turning into a political tool to push for ideas that many of us do not agree with.
                  Last edited by board; 25 January 2021, 10:18 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Firefox has been lagging behind in all departments in comparison to chromium, Speed, Features, and security. Even if they didn't try to make their wound bigger with the blog post where they advocated de-platforming. they simply cannot keep up as a browser.

                    The majority of firefox's user base now is people who don't like chrome(ium) usually because of the spyware.

                    If Mozilla had even half a brain left amoung the head honchos that make the decisions. they would spend a lot less effort on miscellaneous junk. and more on their browser. considering it is still their main source of income I believe

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Quackdoc View Post
                      Firefox has been lagging behind in all departments in comparison to chromium, Speed, Features, and security. Even if they didn't try to make their wound bigger with the blog post where they advocated de-platforming. they simply cannot keep up as a browser.

                      The majority of firefox's user base now is people who don't like chrome(ium) usually because of the spyware.

                      If Mozilla had even half a brain left amoung the head honchos that make the decisions. they would spend a lot less effort on miscellaneous junk. and more on their browser. considering it is still their main source of income I believe
                      It seems like a lot has to do with mismanagement of resources, but not just the kind that you mentioned: https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...89#post1234389

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X