[-] anachronist@midwest.social 1 points 1 day ago

They would have had to build that infrastructure. I'm not saying fundraising is easy. But it's possible as proven by wikipedia. They could have cut Google loose 10 years ago and said "we're going to use our runway to try to put together a wikimedia foundation style fundraising operation. I don't think they can do it now because the trust, goodwill and quite frankly, userbase is gone.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

What on earth would that do? The poisonous leadership would not use it to improve the browser nor would they start working for donors instead of Google.

My point is that there is a funding model that they could have pursued when they still had goodwill and trust. And my hope is if the government finally puts the boot in with Google, then this current version of mozilla will collapse, the rats will leave the ship and hopefully a good browser will emerge the way firefox emerged from netscape.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago

It's the board and the wider leadership who are controlled by Google and intent on destroying Firefox. The current CEO is pretty new, and replaced a heavily criticized CEO that spent years overseeing the decline of Firefox. The new CEO is a former McKinsey consultant.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 4 points 1 day ago

Daily reminder that Mozilla's new CEO is a former McKinsey consultant.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 4 points 1 day ago

Mozilla could have focused on being user-supported through fundraising like Wikipedia. Instead they chose the comfortable path of being funded by their biggest competitor, who is an evil monopoly spyware ad business, which has been compelling Mozilla to kill Firefox and become the badies on the way down.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 7 points 3 days ago

Gonna save this one for later.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 8 points 3 days ago

Israel’s “achievement” is being even worse than that: a warmongering, genocidal apartheid state.

and also

a fascist theocracy

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 29 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Those children weren't civilians, they were potential combatants. Whose to say they wouldn't have grown up to become militants?

Also observing that Israel murders children is anti-semitic. Haven't you ever heard of the black legend?

EDIT: Those children were probably anti-semites who died on purpose so the IDF could be accused of being baby killers.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 10 points 4 days ago

I've been voting for a while and never have I seen a candidate on the ballot who was against capitalism.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 10 points 5 days ago

Support for Israel is "off the table" in American politics. It's something that won't even be offered to voters as a choice. I remember when globalization was like this. Between Ross Perot and Donald Trump you had zero candidates on either side who were anti-globalization.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 12 points 5 days ago

That's too 5-d chess for "the US" to pull off. I find it more plausible that the US supports Israel because Israel has a lot of powerful supporters in the US who manipulate public opinion and government policy.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 40 points 5 days ago

Wow this is batshit.

302

Is it weird to be an American interested in Canadian news?

270
submitted 2 months ago by anachronist@midwest.social to c/memes@lemmy.ml
1284
submitted 2 months ago by anachronist@midwest.social to c/memes@lemmy.ml
463
Crypt force one. (midwest.social)
submitted 2 months ago by anachronist@midwest.social to c/memes@lemmy.ml
756
Citroën did it better (midwest.social)
submitted 2 months ago by anachronist@midwest.social to c/memes@lemmy.ml
998
submitted 4 months ago by anachronist@midwest.social to c/memes@lemmy.ml
view more: next ›

anachronist

joined 1 year ago