It's astounding how shameless Mozilla can be sometimes. They've received billions of dollars over the last 2 decades and accomplished nothing toward an "open and free Internet", if anything regressing.
How about an open and free Internet where anyone can right click a folder and choose "share on the web"? Nginx hasn't had a security vulnerability in 10+ years that affects a basic, static http 1 site.
How about a wysiwyg editor for blog posts with some basic themes and RSS?
How about browsers with built in RSS (oops they removed that) driving a start page?
How about a browser with built in torrent/magnet link support to share videos? Have the wysiwyg editor generate magnets by default when dropping a video.
If you want to be real counter-culture, how about p2p overlay comment systems like dissenter (oops they banned that)?
They've obviously been Google's thrall/controlled opposition for at least a decade. Instead of building infrastructure to give people autonomy to share and interact directly without the control and influence of the web's Owners, the say things like
> digital advertising is critical for the sustainability of free content, services and experiences.
i.e. "you need your owners". Meanwhile there are threads about how $200 mini-pcs have enough horsepower to easily serve 10s of thousands of web requests/second and you can buy 1 TB of flash for $50.
Computers are so incredibly cheap and powerful today that it is obvious that there is no vision in that organization for a "free and open Internet". Anyone familiar with tech knows mega corporations aren't needed to fund it. It's entirely about making it easy/normie friendly to self-host, which Mozilla is somewhere between uninterested and hostile toward.
Most of the functionality you're describing is better relegated to third party websites/software/extensions. I want my web browser to just be a web browser, no unnecessary add-ons.
There's already lots of great solutions for RSS. Ditto for torrents. You can't build a wysiwyg editor that will work across the entire web, there's countless formats which are specific to each website.
They just need to focus on building a top-notch web browser, no unnecessary bells or whistles.
You don't need the wysiwyg editor to be embedded into the browser (though it could share the rendering engine). It's just an enabling technology. And it is doable; they existed in the 90s/2000s! But it's very much within the scope of an organization that's ostensibly trying to build technologies for an open web.
If your goal is to let people self publish something like Twitter/Facebook/Substack posts with embedded video, you don't need much more than a basic rich text editor with some CSS themes (and ability to edit/share custom CSS for advanced users). No JavaScript needed (it's not like those sites let you use it).
Torrenting should have built in support. Torrent support is needed to be able to use magnet links as a src for media. RSS is less necessary, but built in support would be one component of a decent home page like iGoogle tried to build back in the day.
>I want my web browser to just be a web browser, no unnecessary add-ons.
When i try to consider what that really means, it leads me to think it actually encompasses a large and ever-increasing scope of features that have just become the norm. Browsers are becoming almost a general purpose OS.
Also, some of those features clearly require network effect to function which entails having it officially supported and suggested to the users (or even making it default).
Why do you presume it must be built into a browser? Mozilla alteady has mumore products and services than just ff. These ideas could be standalone too.
Mozilla Board abruptly fired CEO Mitchell Baker for poor performance before even locating a replacement. It selected a board member as interim CEO.
Presumably this "performance" refers to profits.
It's astounding that this organisation can advertise itself as a "non-profit" to create an "open and free internet". It is more like an internet advertising trade group. Making sure web browser features align with online ad services.
How about an open and free Internet where anyone can right click a folder and choose "share on the web"? Nginx hasn't had a security vulnerability in 10+ years that affects a basic, static http 1 site.
How about a wysiwyg editor for blog posts with some basic themes and RSS?
How about browsers with built in RSS (oops they removed that) driving a start page?
How about a browser with built in torrent/magnet link support to share videos? Have the wysiwyg editor generate magnets by default when dropping a video.
If you want to be real counter-culture, how about p2p overlay comment systems like dissenter (oops they banned that)?
They've obviously been Google's thrall/controlled opposition for at least a decade. Instead of building infrastructure to give people autonomy to share and interact directly without the control and influence of the web's Owners, the say things like
> digital advertising is critical for the sustainability of free content, services and experiences.
i.e. "you need your owners". Meanwhile there are threads about how $200 mini-pcs have enough horsepower to easily serve 10s of thousands of web requests/second and you can buy 1 TB of flash for $50.
Computers are so incredibly cheap and powerful today that it is obvious that there is no vision in that organization for a "free and open Internet". Anyone familiar with tech knows mega corporations aren't needed to fund it. It's entirely about making it easy/normie friendly to self-host, which Mozilla is somewhere between uninterested and hostile toward.