The current incarnation of Mozilla would not be any meaningful loss to me.
Runterwählen ist kein Gegenargument.
[Verifying my cryptographic key: openpgp4fpr:941D456ED3A38A3B1DBEAB2BC8A2CCD4F1AE5C21]
The current incarnation of Mozilla would not be any meaningful loss to me.
There is exactly no single reason to make this personal. What I meant is that writing a free piece of software does not necessarily have to be paid work. A variety of popular software tools, including a few web browsers, by the way, is written and maintained in the developers’ free time.
“Doing stuff” is not the same thing as “doing paid work”.
Opt-out can never be the right answer.
(and deserve it)
Please enlighten me: how do they deserve to be paid for a non-profit product?
Being a developer myself (with no ads in his software), I don’t think you understand my point. The software I write in my free time does not pay my bills. That’s why I also have an actual job.
What makes you think that developing a free web browser needs to grant anyone any income?
Mozilla actually has (had?) ads in Firefox, right on its default start page.
So is NetSurf, and has been for most of this century already. I mean, it’s great to see people even caring about independent browsers, but NetSurf surely needs much more love (and more developers). :-)
I wish that most forks wouldn’t be even worse. Pale Moon, the most interesting one, is a gang of patent trolls.
If your goal is to ever talk to people about open source software, that’s going to create a lot of unnecessary confusion.
I guess that my definition of open source is not that uncommon, given that the terms “free software” and “libre software” exist and are rather well-established by this point.
People often use the OSI’s Open Source Definition when using the term “open source”.
Which is one of the possible definitions. Mine is “you can see the code”. Everything else falls into “free software”.
I think the new one remains closed. Sadly, not locked away.
What is “actually open source”, if “here’s the source code” is not?
A viable alternative is Guix, which uses Scheme for its scripts and could also use the Hurd kernel instead of Linux, but works the same.
Wait until you see the Lisp community. But yes, Rust is currently in its “why are there even any other languages lol” phase. Just wait.
I understand the reluctance but it feels to me like arguing “we should just stick with COBOL because it works.”
For those depending on COBOL code that does the job and has been doing it just well for a few decades, there are approximately zero good reasons to not stick with it.
Ha, I’ll steal that! “Karen compiler” - quite fitting, to be honest.
Maybe it’s not your profession but a hobby but the point stands.
To be honest, I’ve hardly ever asked myself how I could best please a potential employer with any of my hobbies. But I recognise that you’re probably taking a different approach.
It also expands your employment potential and general usefulness.
I have already mentioned that programming is not everyone’s profession. Not everyone chooses what they do in their unpaid free time primarily based on whether it makes them a more useful person. I think the very phrase ‘my usefulness’ is dangerous.
Are we only worth something as drones?
Other engines exist.