I would say don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, if you have a problem with Mozilla as an organisation it doesn't negate the valid concerns about the monopoly, it would effectively hand control of web standards over to Google defeating the entire ethos of the open web. The Firefox browser engine is independent even if you don't believe the organisation behind it is, that can be verified because of open source, there's no need to be defeatist yet.

I deleted my comment fir a reason 🤨

Comment deletion doesn't always federate straight away, I can still see it.

Answer me this, what chromium browser today is good??

I don't use Chromium browsers because they're at the verge of becoming a monopoly, it's important to use alternatives for the foreseeable future to sustain what's left of diversity.

It depends on your point of view, of the ones I've seen I'd guess Vivaldi has the best user features but it's closed source so there's double reason to not use it. It's what I'd use if I didn't care about any of this. But if you want my genuine browser recommendation from a Privacy perspective (since this is the privacy community) I suggest Mullvad Browser, it's Firefox based and has strong anti-fingerprinting and privacy defaults - it does break some sites though and is missing some QoL features but that's the price you pay.

Oh yes, it would be even worse if we only had one browser engine. We need more browser engines is the point, not more tweaked Chromium browsers.

Can't tell if you're joking but the problem is serious lack of competition for Chromium browsers. Every Chromium browser brings nothing meaningfully new but just strengthens Google's monopoly.

As the person who made the (currently highest upvoted) comment about not needing a new Chromium browser, could you enlighten me on what I should know about "today's industry"?

Don't see the point, the world doesn't need another Chromium browser.

My usual experience with non-computer people is that they really couldn't care less and glaze over at any discussion of software choices what so ever. I've given up even trying to tell them for the most part. If you're not required to use specific software by your employer (thankfully I'm not), then just use what you want and nobody will care, at least in my experience.

Paying for services isn't philosophically incompatible with FOSS, that's how companies like RedHat broke through back in the day, but paying for "quick and high-quality security updates" strikes me as alarming. Am I to take from that that they're holding back high-quality security updates from some users? Unless maybe we're talking about extended support for EoL software.

That's a really misleading headline; a Mastodon instance has done this, Mastodon as a whole can't do this because it's free software, it can be used for any purpose.

Just upgraded. I think I must have been the only person in the world to like the old Fedora installation UI but everyone complained about it so it must be good news that it's gone, as long as I don't hate the new one.

Who is they?