@rugk @avery I simply see it as part of a larger trend within Mozilla that we are currently seeing. Mozilla is heavily marketing the fact that they are not Google and thus the "privacy friendly alternative", even using their good reputation to resell a VPN service. Sure, Mozilla does need to get their finances sorted out (which are quite broken btw), but I definitely see the over-reliance on Google as the least worst option

@rugk @avery Facing it, Google does rely on Firefox as much as Mozilla has to rely on Google. Nobody, not even Google, wants Google to have a monopoly in the web browser market. This would create huge regulatory hurdles for Google (and make changes to Chrome like FLoC even more attention-getting)

@rugk @avery I have continued my rant in a paste, I don't mind if you don't read it, it's gotten quite long and rambly, but I am simply so frustrated with Mozilla and Firefox an kind of needed to write that stuf down

https://paste.sr.ht/~waweic/61cab5f0cff9038b9bcf6f19ec0629ec81c8d707

@waweic @rugk @avery this doesn't seem to stop google from introducing subtle new html artifacts and layout features in their services that either don't exist or render incorrectly in firefox. So they don't seem to support non-chrome anymore anyway. I really don't want a constantly changing to the whims of google massive application platform for a browser. I think I want to go back to lynx and use things like gemini instead.

@tychosoft @rugk @avery Yes, exactly. Firefox is basically a fig leaf for Google to cover up the fact that they more or less have a monopoly in the Browser Engine space

@waweic @rugk @avery it is the increasingly monopolized US tech market with the loss of market diversity and opportunity that represents, that makes me uninterested in doing any future projects in or for the US market.

@waweic @rugk @avery monopolies need not automatically be abusive or destructive, but most often they are, and @google clearly causes harm.