"Vivaldi is closed source, therefore it's harder for users to investigate", which is clearly an inaccurate statement.
Why is it an inaccurate statement?
What user are you thinking of?
You really felt misled that it was harder to inspect? What makes you think I have the expertise to inspect this? I'm not even a user and I wouldn't know where to start to find the ad blocker within that tarball. Would you?
In any case, I clarified why it was harder to inspect - to me it felt obvious that being closed source made it harder to investigate. The fact that it is also shared source really has no bearing to the general observation, especially since we're talking about a 2GB tarball where I don't even know where to start. And I'm a pretty technical person.
How would a user easily investigate this vs. an open source browser?
It is, it is just source available. Still closed source.
You're awesome!
I don't feel like talking to posts proxied from reddit.
Given that Eich was the leader of Mozilla for a short while but he found it hard to stay kinda makes me think Mozilla's leaders are currently better (or at least more acceptable). Can you point to leadership at Mozilla as "bad"?
Opera GX has promised to keep MV2 in their code. So I'll just keep using that until I see something different. The other thing is that Opera GX has built in ad-blocker which is pretty much on par with third parties.
I couldn't find a source for either of these claims. Can you help me out?
Firefox can't fix all the broken sites in the world, but they do investigate issues reported to https://webcompat.com
You can help by reporting sites that don't work for you.
I'm using Fedia - must be an issue with replication or something. I have no control over that, sorry.
What are you a captcha?