The reason Mozilla can even still hold 10% market share in places like Germany is that they're much more compatible with the monopolist than you'd assume, given the circumstances.
Principled stances land you where the GNU operating system is. In obscurity, where people reference you as ethical, but with few actual users outside of versions that are ideologically watered down (but without your control).
You might think that Debian fits that criteria, but offering to enable the nonfree repo (and likely the nonfree repo itself existing) disqualifies it as an endorsed GNU system. That's the comparison.
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware#Debian_12_.28bookworm.29_an...
Stubbornly clinging to principles at the expense of the user experience will alienate all but the most hardcore users.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head to open a Netflix account.
It's basically Popper on tolerance all over again. Herefore it should not be a surprise to notice that Mozilla's strategic failures already are costing us freedom.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance for details.
Or it would simply make Spotify, Netflix and other similar sites not function on Firefox and reduce their market share even more.
Who knows...
> How did it get into the spec? Oh, it got into the spec because when the Content Mafia pressured W3C to include it, Mozilla caved. At the end of the day they said, "We approve of this and will implement it". Their mission -- their DUTY -- was to pound their shoe on the god damned table and say: "We do not approve, and will not implement if approved."
The platform is not locked down (in ten years it might as well be), so the only question is which pipeline step the heist will happen at.
https://www.jwz.org/blog/2024/06/mozillas-original-sin/
Not sure if everyone is aware, but jwz was an original Netscape developer, and an advocate for creating the free software licensing that created mozilla when netscape went bankrupt.
So he really is an authoritative source on the mozilla story...
