this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
211 points (89.5% liked)

Work Reform

10706 readers
137 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Link to original post: https://mastodon.social/@blogdiva/111932214690841585

Link to news link shown in the photo: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/mozilla-lays-off-60-people-wants-to-build-ai-into-firefox/

Cooperative ownership for all businesses too!

all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Vash63@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Firefox is developed in the open and accepts outside contributions already. The only thing this is adding is a paid membership.

[–] Rebels_Droppin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A paid membership to vote on changes and additions to the program. I think that would be pretty beneficial honestly.

[–] GenEcon@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So instead of a free vote you only get a paid vote?

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is there a free vote now? Have I somehow missed this?

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

accepts outside contributions already

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure but those contributors don’t have a functional role in managing the project. This idea seems clearly distinct from the status quo.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They do? in fact they dictate almost the entire project, that's how open source works

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't need a co-op for that. Just fork it and make the changes.

[–] Rebels_Droppin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

True, you can. But for people who may not have the skill or time but still value the browser, I think it isn't a bad idea. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

[–] Bob_Robertson_IX@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Then pay someone who does have the time and skill to fork it and make the change you want.

[–] Nesola@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The mass won’t even consider being part of a paid membership of a cooperative that’s only purpose is a web browser. That would be the way to drive them even more into Chrome or Safari.

[–] DARbarian@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well this just sounds like Librewolf with more steps

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

And hopefully Librewolf keeps AI out of their code.

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You see cooperation, I see a subscription.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

If there was legal ownership that would be different. But it's open source so cooperative ownership doesn't add much. It's already there for everyone to use and modify as they like

[–] ProvableGecko@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, I remember how the "community" reacted when they made that homophobic asshole quit. They still won't shut the fuck up about it, about how mozilla cares more about wokeness than the browser whenever there's a girls' coding initiative or the like. I don't want those assholes having a say in anything.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't see much benefit of a fork being a member coop, since the product is already free. I could potentially see a worker coop - if this fork was intended to make a profit, and the people working on it are then incentivized to improve the product because they'll personally benefit, then maybe we'd see more movement and innovation.

[–] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The fork is to preserve the core browser experience and provide security updates. If you hate AI jank bloating software, your best options for a browser is ~~Chrome~~ suffering. Certainly, you can refuse updates on Firefox going forward if they commit to this path, but you’re a single missing patch away from being an easier target for bad actors to exploit your security vulnerabilities

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

nothing stops forks from implementing the same security features....

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

Inb4 Google buys up 51% of memberships and "vote" to move Firefox to Chromium.

[–] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Interesting!