Might not do much for the upcoming Manifest v3 doomsday but at least the current government recognises the ills of big tech as it currently stands.
But is this just tactics to win an election? Will they go the distance on any trust issue, or is it all vapour?
So now Mozilla can stop receiving their hush money, right?
Maybe we should not let companies to work in a lot of areas. For example Amazon, SaaS IaaS Paas Ecommerce, ARM processors, among others. Maybe we should contain megadiversified enterprises??
Not sure why ARM is on your angry list. They are more than happy to sell rights to other manufacturers. As far as I can tell, they have not done anything wrong, yet.
The example is Amazon who have their own ARM CPUs for their datacenters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AWS_Graviton
You don’t pre-emptively punish people not causing harm. That’s a bad way to go.
Google no longer has the motto of “dont be evil”, I wonder why…
Fine: About $3.50
Punitive damages: lol
The fine isnt important, its if any breaking up of the company comes of it
You don’t need to bring your library. Having your library split between multiple platforms isn’t a big deal and most people do it. You just don’t give them any more money.
People didn’t not buy DVDs because they had a library of VHSs.
Uh yes many of us did not buy dvds because we had vhs and couldn’t afford to switch to a new medium.
Just like if we had a dvd collection we didn’t go to HDDVD / Blueray. Many people never got into Blu-ray at all
But eventually we had to and now we have issues with drm and losing purchased digital media on streaming services
I’m not talking about replacing your VHS collection but buying DVDs in addition. You would still watch both. Maybe buying a DVD player was a barrier. But it wasn’t that you owned VHS.
Yes it was for many many people. You seem to find this hard to believe.
Blueray/HDDvd was out before the majority of people stopped using their vhs collections.
As tvs went digital and high def it took a long time for people to care enough to upgrade/replace
Ok then switch to streaming. My point was just that just because you have a VHS collection doesn’t mean you can’t get media in another way and still use your VHS collection. And most people would use both while they transitioned. Throwing out all your VHSs for the hot new thing isn’t something a lot of people did. Or throwing out all your DVDs because streaming is a thing. People aren’t restricted to one thing.
Blueray/HDDvd was out before the majority of people stopped using their vhs collections.
Do you have a citation on this? Personally I was DVD only until I got an Xbox One, which could play Blurays.
And we got DVDs because my brother marketed getting a PS2 to my family as a DVD player and a Video Game system, as one of those alone cost the same as a PS2 at the time.
And we gave up VHS tapes long before, as space is at a premium for us. Worse quality, worse features, more work to rewatch something, bigger format, etc.
But there is an alternative, search engines that say that are independent but then come crashing down when Bing goes down, which belongs to another convicted yet still existing monopoly.
Please let an outcome from this enable users to change the default Android search from Google search 🙏
Biggest “so far” they’re far from the only.
Finally, some good fucking news
this is why it’s silly that people are mad at mozilla for buying a privacy friendly ad company to try and break the monopoly.
In a healthy market new browsers need to be able to enter… but browsers are so complex from the reckless, endless feature creep that creating a new browser securely (or at all) is unreasonable. (Luckily they are open source and can be forked but the changes are minor compared to the base. A Chromium fork is still Chromium at the end of the day).
Supporting the ad-driven internet is contrary to what is wanted by many users of Firefox/flavors and there is no alternative. It was said that they would destroy the Sith, not join them.
Supporting the ad-driven internet
The thing is that there’s not really a good alternative. There’s real costs in running a service - servers, bandwidth, staff, etc. Either you pay for content directly (subscription services), someone else pays for you (which is the case with many Lemmy servers where admins are paying out of their own pockets), or ads cover the cost for you. People want to use the web for free, so ad-supported content is going to be around for a long time.
I would rather pay for works directly, so I prefer a browser with no ads ever.
Sure, that makes sense. A lot of people can’t afford that though, especially in poorer countries.
But then advertising to them is less lucrative too.
I disliked adverts so much as a time waster of limited human life. There may not be a good alternative to dumping toxic waste into a river, for example, but I still think we shouldn’t do it.
Can’t speak for others but I do donate (not as much as I’d like) to Wikipedia and buy merch from some creators (if I like it for what it is).
Its seriously absurd. I hate ads, but there’s realistically not a better option to profit when providing free software and services like Mozilla is doing. Investing into ads that don’t violate your privacy is a great decision. I don’t know what the hell people want from them.
People don’t seem to realise that developing a browser (a real one, not Chrome with a different paint job), web rendering engine, having the top-notch security expertise that building a modern web engine requires, plus being on the board that decides web standards is expensive.
It’s honestly at a similar scale and complexity to OS development now.
We’re talking hundreds of millions a year to do the work that Mozilla needs to do. People who say “oh I’d chip in a dollar or two, but only if they get rid of all other funding” as if it’s feasible kind of get on my nerves because they clearly don’t see the big picture.
Any time Mozilla tries to diversify their income while still being broadly privacy-respecting they’re branded as evil or too corporate. Any time they ask for donations they’re being greedy beggars. When they take Google’s money they’re shills for big tech. They can’t win. People want Mozilla to work for free.
Exactly. Browser’s are insanely fucking complex, the codebases of Firefox and Chromium are MASSIVE. There is zero chance Mozilla could ever make enough money simply off of donations.
I don’t know what the hell people want from them.
these people are probably already using forks anyway
They want them to meet all of their impossibly high and contradictory standards at the same time. For free. What’s so hard about that?? /s
They should do it like Signal: accept donations. Signal is doing just fine. But Mozilla cannot legally do that as they are a for-profit company. And Mozilla Foundation won’t do that either because they are funded by Mozilla and under their command.
Google pays them 400 million. You really think they’re going to get anywhere close to that from donations?
You can accept donations if you’re a for-profit company, there’s no rule against that.
You can do crowdfunding. But general donations is illegal in the US if I understand that correctly. https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/charitable-solicitation-state-requirements
You underestimate the complexity of a web browser if you compare it to instant messaging app
They’re comparing the business models, not the software itself.
The problem is the business models revolve around the software. You cannot directly compare them without also comparing the complexity and manpower required to achieve it. Just take a look at W3C spec and you’ll see just how many cases there are to handle when making a browser. Not to mention making it secure and performant. Also, if you want to support web push technology on your browser you also need to have infrastructure to maintain. A donation may work but you’ll have to be content with slow development since the resources can be uncertain.
Signal is a teeny tiny little pet project compared to an entire browser and rendering engine.
Not silly at all. It’s a ship of Theseus situation, and the ship has helmsmen with bad attitudes. Bad attitudes engender bad decisionmaking.
Clone Teddy Roosevelt.
Mark my words! the outcome of this will be like a mountain giving birth to a mouse.
Microsoft came out of such antitrust lawsuit unscathed and a decade later went back to pushing its browser down everyone’s throat.
A mountain giving birth to a mouse? Is that a translation from another language? I’m not being critical, it’s just oddly specific and bizarre.
Yeah it is a french expression, the english equivalent is " a long harvest for a little corn "
Here is a link to read about it, its meaning and use and its equivalent in other languages : link
I’ve heard long climb for a short slide.
‘Biggest Antitrust Case of the 21st Century’ so far…
We can only hope
we have so many freaking monopolies now a days. we really need to keep companies from owning so much. bring back the media limits and no company should be able to own multiple areas of healthcare and such.
