Will Firefox rise like phoenix from the ashes in 2024?

Martin Brinkmann
Jan 7, 2024

2024 will be an interesting year for web browsers. Google will make changes to its dominating Chrome web browser that may affect part of the browser's userbase negatively.

There is the move to Manifest V3 for extensions, which may impact content blockers, privacy extensions and some other extensions negatively. There is also Privacy Sandbox and the end of third-party cookie tracking, which bakes tracking into the browser directly to give Google even more control over user data while making it more difficult for others to keep up.

A main question that comes up is if other browsers will benefit from this, and if they do, which will benefit more than others.  There is a chance that most Chrome users simply don't care about all of this. If the sites they visit continue to work and if Google's "privacy" euphemisms worked as well, then Chrome may not lose much, if anything at all user-wise.

Chrome users have two core options when it comes to switching browsers. They can select another Chromium-based browser, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera or even Microsoft Edge come to mind. It seems a logical choice. They get the same web compatibility as in Chrome, can continue using all their extensions, and import most of their browsing data as well. It is a seamless process.

The problem with it is that these browsers are under constant pressure to evaluate features that Google pushes into Chromium, the open source core. Google controls Chromium, which is why other Chromium-based browser makers can only react to most of the changes indirectly.

Google introduces a change in Chromium, which would land in all Chromium-based browsers, unless it is disabled somehow by an engineer. Brave maintains a list of features and services that it removes from Chromium on a GitHub page. It is a growing list of features that Brave considers problematic for privacy or security reasons.

Firefox as an option

The second option that Chrome users have is to switch to Firefox. Firefox is the only major browser, with the exception of the special case Safari, that is not based on Chromium.

This is both an advantage and a disadvantage. On the plus side, Mozilla has full control over Firefox. If Google introduces a new feature in Chromium and Chrome, Mozilla may still decide to implement it. It can also ignore it, especially if it looks to be negative for users.

The disadvantage is that Mozilla needs to spend resources on development, more than the non-Chrome Chromium-based browsers. It may take more time to implement new standards and features. There is also performance and stability to consider.

Most Chromium-based browsers match the web compatibility and performance of Chrome. Firefox fights a battle with every new release. Some sites may not work in Firefox because they expect a Chromium-based browser.

It does not help that Mozilla does not control any major platform. Microsoft uses Windows to push its Edge browser, and Google uses its web properties to push Chrome.

Firefox: criticism

There is a lot to like about Firefox, but there is also criticism. While some is up for debate, like the constantly rising payments to Mozilla CEO and executives, others appear clearer.

Mozilla still paints Firefox as a privacy-first browser. If you look at the claim, you may quickly realize that this is not entirely true. While Firefox does come with privacy tools, it also collects and sends Telemetry by default. It has not helped Mozilla's case that it ran a few "how could you ever do this" kind of experiments in Firefox, like the Mr. Robots incident. Back in 2017, Mozilla installed an add-on, Looking Glass, automatically in Firefox. It turned out later that this extension was a collaboration with the makers of the TV show Mr. Robot.

This incident and several others still haunt discussions about Firefox and privacy.

You can turn Firefox into a privacy fortress, but you need to do so yourself. Turn off Telemetry, make dozens of other switches and changes. It is still excellent for that, but the default installation is a compromise between privacy, Mozilla's interests, and Telemetry that Firefox collects and Mozilla uses.

Rise from the ashes?

It will be difficult to make a U-turn and get a positive momentum. The unlocking of full add-ons support in Firefox for Android may be the Firestarter that Mozilla needed.

Firefox for Android is a minor browser on the platform. Yes, it has millions of users, it is just a tiny fraction of the entire Android userbase.

Extensions support is one feature that sets Firefox apart from all major Chrome browsers. None support extensions. The main reason for that probably has to do with Google being an advertising company. Why invite users to install content blockers in Chrome when you control the market and would torpedo your bottom line?

Google could not pull the stunt on desktop, as the competition was much fiercer there. Chrome might still be the leading browser on desktop if Google made the decision to ship it without extensions, but it would likely not dominate the market.

One of Mozilla's failures in the past was that it constantly looked as if it was following Google and Chrome in its decision making process. Google implemented something, like Tabs on Top, and Mozilla followed. Features that set Firefox apart, like Ubiquity, Firefox Panorama, or Janus, were all dropped.

Even without these, there is little that sets Firefox apart visually from Chrome.

Mozilla needs to get the first movers on its side again. Some are still there, but many have moved on. To do this, the organization has to make hard decisions. Make Firefox a true privacy-friendly browser out of the box.

It is perfectly fine to display a "please enable Telemetry to help us" page during initial setup, but keep all of this disabled. Don't use third-party analytics or the like either, make Firefox the browser with the least number of outbound connections by default. Check Privacy Tests and implement protections, provided that they make sense to beat any other browser there.

Make Firefox the privacy browser so that it shines when compared to Chrome.  This step might convince old users who left and new users alike to give Firefox a chance.

If you are a pessimist, you may see Firefox losing another million or two of its users in 2024. Mozilla CEO and executives getting another raise, and Mozilla continuing to push non-Firefox products and services using Firefox as the driver.

Now You: where do you see Firefox in 2025?

Will Firefox rise like phoenix from the ashes in 2024?
Article Name
Will Firefox rise like phoenix from the ashes in 2024?
Can Firefox rise from the ashes in 2024 to gain new users and marketshare? There is a chance that this will indeed happen. Here is why.
Ghacks Technology News

Tutorials & Tips

Previous Post: «
Next Post: «


  1. Anonymous said on January 17, 2024 at 7:29 am

    Google Chrome bad, agreed.
    Firefox good, and so is Brave.

    Brave can be better than Firefox when using Google products, e.g., Docs, Sheets, etc.

    Edge has an overwhelming user interface that makes me afraid to use it.

    I have run 2 websites that don’t work with Firefox.

  2. Anonymous said on January 8, 2024 at 10:12 pm

    You forgot the part where the company ousted its previous CEO over his religious beliefs in the criticism part.

    1. Anonymous said on January 9, 2024 at 8:56 am


      It was more complicated than that. Says he resigned, not fired after protests.


      “After 11 days as CEO, Eich resigned on April 3, 2014, and left Mozilla over his opposition to same-sex marriage.”

    2. Tim said on January 9, 2024 at 8:13 am

      You do realize that was over 15 years ago, right? Time to move on, maybe?

  3. Naimless said on January 8, 2024 at 8:44 pm

    LOL are you kidding? This is laughable. Google Chrome is not going anywhere no matter what they do. Every other browser fallow Chrome. When ManifestV3 comes round you will see all other browsers will implement it. Google controls the Web these days. Firefox too is on the mercy of Google. If some day Google stops founding them, they are screwed. I use both Chrome and Edge. No need for other browsers. They are all the same. For me it’s just a matter of preference.

  4. Michael said on January 8, 2024 at 6:23 pm

    Google is an advertising company and that’s basically why I dislike their services, ie. Chrome. Brave is equally bad with their crypto scam and past dodgy behaviour. Because of this and because of better customizability, Firefox is my preferred browser on all devices.

    Don’t care too much for Mozilla though, they do weird things. Ideally, somebody should fork Firefox and we as a community should support future development. But unless Chrome seriously shoots itself in the foot with the 2024 changes, the chance of building momentum behind such a movement is probably close to zero. It would end up like Palemoon, obscure and irrelevant.

  5. Herman Cost said on January 8, 2024 at 5:54 pm

    Great clickbait title, Martin. :-)

  6. Anon said on January 8, 2024 at 12:55 pm

    Personally I use Chrome, Firefox, Edge and Vivaldi. Sometimes I use Brave, but usually just delete since I don’t buy into the whole crypto scam and I find Brave to be sketchy because it’s an ad company masquerading as a “privacy” company. At the end of the day I do love Firefox, but I love the other browsers too. I think Chrome is great for when you need to work within the Google ecosystem, and Edge is great when you need to work within the Microsoft ecosystem, Vivaldi for customization is great too. Even when Manifest V3 is fully implemented I will stick to using these browsers. The people who complain about ads 24/7 are nothing but spoiled crybabies who think they are entitled to using infrastructure owned and operated by private companies free of charge with nothing in return. I’ve got news for you little babies, the world doesn’t work that way. Why do you think so many companies and creators started putting just about everything behind paywalls? You either pay for the content/services or you support them by seeing their ads. There is no such thing as a free ride.

  7. Sebas said on January 8, 2024 at 8:58 am

    Yes I know, dumb question, unethecially too, but could Yandex browser be an alternative for Google Chrome, regarding Manifest V3?

    1. bruh said on January 11, 2024 at 3:22 pm

      Man I wish Yandex would detach from chromium base, they have the resources to do so!

  8. Bobo said on January 8, 2024 at 6:04 am

    If Firefox & uBlock Origin continue to block ads, I do not care if the CEO steals 99% of all the money Google throws at her/him/it. People are greedy. People are scum. So is the Mozilla CEO, bigtime. So would you and I also be, when put in a similar situation where we could legally steal a crapload of money and get away with. Let’s face it: IF and WHEN Firefox starts to win over users from Chrome, Google will stop throwing money at Mozilla and that will be the death of Firefox pretty soon. Google basically has a monopoly now and that should make us all worried. An advertising company basically owns the internet. Still, I don’t actually care, I just don’t want to see any ads anywhere ever.

  9. yupIsaidit said on January 8, 2024 at 4:11 am

    I switched to Firefox after my Chrome browser crashed on me for the thousandth time. I absolutely hate having Google know my ever move and then pepper me with ads. I love to shop but when ever thing I have ever googled is brought up repeatedly I am done. Chrome really lost me when I was trying to shop and it kept shoving my location. This is near your location. If I wanted to shop at my location which has no stores, no inventory and barely does groceries and Walmart then it might be helpful. I want to able to to search for things based in the US and then maybe overseas. Chrome’s shopping is ad driven which means you see their favorites first based on my stupid location. It takes many pages just to find honest competition for the item I am searching for. I can honestly say I hate Chrome. I love Mozilla and most of the stuff in this article I have never had a problem with. My company uses both Chrome and Firefox and I have good results with both with Firefox stretching ahead. As for Bing? NO! Just NO! I have also tried several others but I always come back to Firefox and Mozilla.

    1. John G. said on January 8, 2024 at 2:34 pm

      After more than 12 years using Chrome here, no crash at all. However it’s my third browser.

  10. penny said on January 8, 2024 at 4:05 am

    you the same guys that used to say playstation is so much better because games! guys, no one cares. whats the point of hating on another product lol…..

  11. Graham said on January 8, 2024 at 3:05 am

    Mozilla has lost so much good will and relevance from its user base over the years to ever rise from the ashes again. Firefox is an irreparably damaged, fallen relic that can never fully recover.

  12. kstev99 said on January 7, 2024 at 11:52 pm

    I’ve never been fond of Google Chrome in my opinion it is the equivalent of installing a virus on my system. Why people are attracted to Google spyware when Firefox is the most customizable, private browser ever. Only TOR browser surpasses it for privacy, but even that is based on Mozilla Firefox.

    Chrome lacks features that I strongly rely on in Firefox. Firefox Containers for one, and users have been screaming for a bookmarks sidebar for years but it only falls on deaf ears. Sure there are a couple of extensions but they aren’t even close in functionality. Want to arrange the icons on your main toolbar? Not with Chrome, Firefox….have at it ! Plus the extensions library is probably 10X that of chrome. I think that people who switch to Firefox will be pleasantly surprised.

    1. bruh said on January 8, 2024 at 3:51 pm

      Chrome has better history management than Firefox… by a long shot. That’s all I can think of atm

  13. Nebulus said on January 7, 2024 at 11:08 pm

    “where do you see Firefox in 2025?”

    I see it on my computers and phones as a primary browser, as always.

  14. George said on January 7, 2024 at 10:25 pm

    Waterfox and Librefox is a good choice ifbyou don’t want to use Firefox.

    Don’t forget Thunderbird, Mozilla make a mess with an excellent mail program, they are changing the usability and a lot of plugins or add-ons.

    1. bruh said on January 8, 2024 at 3:48 pm

      Quick question: These forks of Firefox, what do they actually do?

      Do they just add/remove/modify features inside the browser, or do they actually work on website compatibility and rendering, making sure modern frameworks, javascript, all the cutting edge nonsense works? Aka the thing that a browser is actually most needed for?

      I know Firefox team is working on this to the best of their ability, are the other forks also doing this, and if so, is their website compatibility better, worse, or identical to firefox’s?

      1. Anonymous said on January 9, 2024 at 6:09 pm

        It’s mostly configuration, so are things you could in principle do yourself when going into settings and about:config. But as most people don’t have the slightest clue what they are doing or could do, these variants (eg Arkenfox or Mullvad) are an option for the clueless and/or lazy.
        Usually there is no hard modification of the browser source done.
        As a tendency the website compatibility will be be rather lower, than higher, but that’s not because of the browser, but because of site developers making working privacy intrusive methods mandatory for the site access. So strengthening privacy automatically leads to problems with such sites.
        These variants are mostly about shutting things down (eg telemetry data being send to Mozilla) or activating things per default (considered by Mozilla to be too intrusive for general activation, eg RFP (Resist FingerPrinting), which is the stricter variant of the per default activated anti-fingerprint version.)

  15. boris said on January 7, 2024 at 9:07 pm

    So my options in 2024 to switch to either Brave or Firefox. Not too much of a choice, but at least something to look forward to.

  16. Anonymous said on January 7, 2024 at 7:57 pm

    They have lost 60 million in 4 or 5 years?
    I mean, it should answer your question, because it is a terrible question, nobody outside few fanboys care about Firefox, and the few anti-Chromium ideologist that force themselves to use anything but Chromium even if Chromium is better.

    So no. Firefox will not rise, and actually, Mozilla only exists because of Google’s search deal, without it, they would be nothing.

  17. Tachy said on January 7, 2024 at 6:14 pm

    “You can turn Firefox into a privacy fortress, but you need to do so yourself.” – False

    TOR browser, very secure but slow and Mullvad, less secure but much faster, are both based on Firefox.

    No need to “do it yourself”.

  18. 45 RPM said on January 7, 2024 at 2:43 pm

    First, why this ancient and definitely untrue about FF today and actually for years: “There is also performance and stability to consider.” No, there isn’t. Period. If you have examples, write an article with research results.

    “Some sites may not work in Firefox because they expect a Chromium-based browser.” Which?
    I have never in the past many years encountered one, and if such exist, that’s a pretty lame website. Also it means that Chrome is dictating things that are Chrome-only standards which stinks of old IE.

    As to politics, really? Google donates fortunes to politicians to get favorable attention and avoid well deserved anti-trust attention and much else. Privacy violations alone render Chrome the worst browser.

    1. Anonymous said on January 8, 2024 at 2:49 am

      I’m sorry but corruption isn’t a thing in the United States. Maybe it is in the country you’re from but our politicians know better than to sell out for something that’d hurt American citizens.

      1. 45 RPM said on January 8, 2024 at 3:41 pm

        Hey Anonymous, I *AM* from the USA. If you don’t understand how much influence big bags of money to election campaigns and donations to charities run by the wives of Senators, or what an invitation to a sporting event like the Super Bowl in a VIP box will get you, you have no clue. ALL of those are legal. That doesn’t make it right, but it is real. In many other countries you just hand someone a wad of cash during lunch and get whatever you want. We are not better, just more, shall we say, refined (sarcasm).

        Google donates A LOT of money and hires A LOT of lobbyists whose job includes such things as taking folks to an elite Golf club, Superbowl tickets.

      2. Josie Thornton said on January 8, 2024 at 7:46 am


        HAHA lol. It’s cute you think that.

    2. ECJ said on January 7, 2024 at 6:49 pm

      Various sites display a “Firefox is not a supported browser” message. While this is not a Firefox issue, this is problematic for Mozilla. This would prevent me rolling Firefox out to normal users, as they just expect the web to work; normal users don’t care about the technical reasons for message. And all it takes is for them to experience this one or two times and they will ask you to change their browser (or do it themselves). The website working is the only thing they care about and anything getting in their way is a problem. This only has to happen once or twice – it doesn’t matter if all the other websites work correctly.

      Then there are cases where they may receive a video conferencing link that will take them to a webpage where they can participate in a video conference without installing an app. However, it won’t work in Firefox.


      Sometimes page contents don’t display correctly, like the animations on the page below not displaying.


      To be clear, I would much prefer an open web standard to succeed and for Firefox to do well, however I don’t see how they can realistically do this. I can’t see how Mozilla can keep their own browser engine going long term – it’s too much of an uphill struggle and they don’t have the resources. The web is a platform and with platforms, market share matters. Mozilla can point the finger at web developers, but the reality is Firefox market share is too low to have any clout. It’s difficult for web developers to justify spending additional time and money to test and make things work in Firefox, when they can already target >96% of browsers just by targeting Chrome and Safari. Convincing the people paying for it is a tough sell and this is out of Mozilla’s control.

      Microsoft and Brave recognised this problem a long time ago, hence why they opted for Chromium. As did email clients like eM Client.

      Mozilla have a real big problem on their hands. As do we, because as things currently stand, it seems inevitable we are looking at a future where the web is entirely controlled by Google. It’s also only a matter of time before Google determine that Firefox market share no longer warrants Google paying them large sums of money, which means Mozilla are really going to be up a creek without a paddle.

      1. just an Ed said on January 8, 2024 at 6:01 pm

        Well, I thought it interesting that the link to NHS didn’t work, but Linux wasn’t mentioned as being supported at all, while Windows 7 was. I had no trouble with anything on the GOG link you provided. I have found that every site I actually use works well in Firefox. Some US and NY State government forms don’t, but that’s on Linux, not Firefox. NY, interestingly, requires Adobe.

      2. Anonymous said on January 8, 2024 at 10:39 pm

        Not all sites tell you FF is unsupported. The just don’t accept your log in. LiveXLive is a glaring example. No warning, no message banner. Nothing happens when you login.

    3. Midori said on January 7, 2024 at 6:14 pm

      I agree with you

    4. Shadow_Death said on January 7, 2024 at 6:00 pm

      “Some sites may not work in Firefox because they expect a Chromium-based browser.” Which?
      I have never in the past many years encountered one, and if such exist, that’s a pretty lame website. Also it means that Chrome is dictating things that are Chrome-only standards which stinks of old IE.

      The interesting thing about this is even Google’s sites which seem to “Break” in Firefox work great if you spoof your client and tell the site you’re using Chrome. Even more so in Firefox on Android. Google defaults to an old square UI with a bunch of missing features. If you spoof that client and tell the site it’s Chrome it renders like it’s in chrome with round edges and runs smooooth.

      Google’s sites are the only ones I seem to ever have “issues” with when I use Firefox.

  19. John said on January 7, 2024 at 2:33 pm

    The irony is that if Google stopped paying Mozilla to have its search engine be default in Firefox the Mozilla foundation would die along with their inflated overpaid administration that lacks any sort of will to actually make Firefox a good browser alternative.

    1. Degoogle said on January 7, 2024 at 9:47 pm

      MS, maybe even apple would fund it to almost the same amount like they proposed before.

      The main change would be administrative. Instead of lumping the fixed payment for making google the default together with the royalty payment for the past year, both would be separate (default being upfront and not dependant on views or ad displays, while use of either google or bing would pay the same royalties even if people change the default engine). Total sum obtained was the same but it was made to look too high to give up by lumping together other agreements into one opaque deal.

      That said, mozilla’s issue is mismanaging funds, putting too many hobbyist experiments under its payroll (people trying to justify pay?) and the source monolithic rather than keep the gecko engine, the firefox shell and other components separately developped. It shouldve long gone with linux kernel’s model, where companies pay some of their own employees to work on the project and ensure whatever they produce works well.

  20. Red said on January 7, 2024 at 10:40 am

    I doubt it will ever rise.

    It lacks even basic functions Chromium based browsers have. Like auto-completing the site address after the first typed characters. Like translating languages that are a few for months and months.

    And so on. It’s just outdated, because Mozilla cared and still cares more about involving in projects that have nothing to do with an IT company more so with a browser.

    1. InsaRa said on January 7, 2024 at 3:01 pm

      auto-completing the site address in Firefox
      about:config set browser.urlbar.autoFill.adaptiveHistory.enabled = true.

      translate is in BETA but is present

    2. Anonymous said on January 7, 2024 at 12:20 pm

      These are Chrome features no thinking human want’s to have, as in Chrome these are achieved via remote calls, so that every key press or text is send back to Google.
      You can configure search suggestions in Firefox this way, but one shouldn’t.
      And regarding translations: Firefox now has a translation feature, which actually works pretty well. The good thing about it: unlike Chrome (which submits the text to be translated to the google servers and receives the translation in return, so that google even knows exactly what you read, which is of course great for marketing or all other sorts of profiling), they have a local translation engine implemented into the browser, so that none of the browsed content leaves your system.
      It’s similar with all the AI features currently creeping into browsers everywhere. Currently none of this is processed locally, meaning whatever you type in is send to a remote servers (and stored there forever), which is why Firefox’s Cache memory project, doing everything locally is so interesting.

      The problem here is, that people like you either don’t understand the technology and what is actually happening or they don’t care for the sake of seeming comfort, even calling such quite irrelevant features “basic”.
      This is like handing all your money over to a guy who is willing to take care of it for you, which is so comfy and really great until it suddenly isn’t anymore and the crying starts.

      1. pHROZEN gHOST said on January 7, 2024 at 6:45 pm

        Microphone drop!

  21. Iron Heart said on January 7, 2024 at 9:48 am

    > 2024 will be an interesting year for web browsers.

    No, it won’t be. What makes you believe that? The people who do care about adblocking are a minority, and the people for whom MV3 won’t be “good enough” are a minority within that minority.

    More to the point, Firefox grew back then simply because Internet Explorer flat out sucked, and because Chrome did not yet exist. As soon as Chrome appeared on the scene, it started eating both IE’s and Firefox’s cake. Internet Explorer development stalled for a good number of years, that won’t happen for Chromium because a lot of companies have a vested interest in continued development. The recent AI (more correctly: LLM) push also made sure that interest in enhancing the feature set of browsers won’t stall anytime soon.

    Mozilla spends only part of the money they’ve got on Firefox, the rest goes to questionable political initiatives:


    They are also already diversifying their products, actively trying to ween themselves off Firefox:


    Firefox’s future will either be it switching to a Chromium base in order to cut cost, just like Opera did, or it being dropped entirely, with Mozilla switching to subscription-based services and otherwise becoming an activist organization in nature, more so than it already is.

    The future of Firefox is looking rather grim. Also, outside of the discussion of whether or not it’s actually realistic to wait for a Mozilla turnaround, why would I want one to happen? Mozilla is one of the most anti-free speech companies I have ever seen, combined with the fact that they are actively badmouthing the only way to break up big tech dominance, i.e. decentralization. They are promoting articles that call architectures which aren’t heavily centralized and thus censorship-prone “the decentralized web of hate”. Nothing more to add apart from “good riddance”.

    1. Karl said on January 9, 2024 at 7:05 am

      Well, I have read what some of the “critics” say about Lunduke, I do not “follow” him anywhere, I have so far read 3 posts by him in total, all on the “corps” subject. I did not find anything incorrect in any of them. I don’t care about his political views or personal life in any way or form, or what he might personally think about i.e Mozilla. I don’t need to know anything about him, agree or disagree with him personally to read what he post. I only care about that what I read is factually correct and not any “fake” statistics added to make anything look better or worse, and from what I can see they are simple facts taken from the “official” report and nothing else, yes, with his personal comments about where i.e. Mozilla are heading, with which one can agree or disagree, but I happen to think that they are more or less in line with how things are developing within Mozilla.

    2. Truth Triggers said on January 8, 2024 at 10:23 pm

      Well said

      1. Truth Triggers Truth Triggers said on January 9, 2024 at 9:05 am

        You sound triggered.

    3. Michael said on January 8, 2024 at 4:46 pm

      Dude ffs… The Lunduke guy is a known nutter. He went completely off his rails a while back, Qanon-gibberish and all.

      Check your sources friend.

      1. griftos said on January 9, 2024 at 12:31 am

        He declares https is dangerous. Because using non https is so much more secure. Obviously.


    4. griftos said on January 8, 2024 at 8:00 am

      I don’t think this landuck guy is credible,


      1. Karl said on January 9, 2024 at 6:39 am

        Apparently, that is posted by the so called “parody” account that some critic started. The good folks can make fun of him, but he can not make fun of others.


    5. griftos said on January 8, 2024 at 4:01 am

      Don’t pay these guys any attention, they’re still mad about getting scammed by their Freedom Phone.

    6. crimethink said on January 8, 2024 at 12:54 am

      Anyone notice how most the people who rant about Firefox do so because of political reasons and not the technical merits of the browser?

      Firefox sucks because they have opinions I don’t agree with! Cancel them! I don’t care they haven’t blocked a single website, cancel them because they commit thought crimes!

    7. Anonymous said on January 7, 2024 at 9:13 pm

      Hopefully Martin won’t ban too many of the comments calling out IH nonsense.

    8. bravetard said on January 7, 2024 at 6:05 pm

      Congrats on finding a website other than maidian to spam us with constantly. Although when reading the lundike article on Firefox keep this reddit thread in mind.


    9. Karl said on January 7, 2024 at 2:42 pm

      “Mozilla is one of the most anti-free speech companies I have ever seen….”

      Indeed. The only thing I hope is that nobody in the current management team, including the CEO, will find their way over to some other company and destroy that as well. Well, all of the Mozillians could be hired by META/Facebook of course, that will probably end on a happy note.

      “Facebook and Instagram are the two most privacy-invasive apps. Both apps collect all 32 data points defined by Apple and are the only two to do so.”

      Just imagine what Ms. Baker could do with all of that “web of hate” data…

      1. bravetard said on January 9, 2024 at 12:22 am


        If you actually read the “web of hate” pdf beyond the title, it actually warns against centralizing the internet because of free speech concerns. The document does not advocate a solution, it just points how hate speech spreads on the internet.

      2. Karl said on January 9, 2024 at 8:37 am


        The issue is definitely Mozilla’s (and all their like-minded friends) many different definitions of so called “hate speech”. But why be a critical thinker. People like the below extremely smart folks can decide what “hate speech” is for us. They are so smart that they are actively pushing for it to save us all from online hate and disinformation once and for all. Tech-savvy politicians know what the people worldwide want and need. In them we must wholeheartedly trust, especially the elected ones. Fortunately, the trusty mainstream media constantly makes loads of articles about this urgent topic to let their readers know, zero.


        “”UN says that censoring “disinformation” and “hate speech” will protect “free speech””

        “Iceland’s PM says the country is working to counter “hate speech” and “disinformation”
        While addressing a UN group.”

        “Brazil’s President rails against online “hate speech” and “disinformation,” calls for global action”

        “Hate Speech’ Laws Are Just Another Way For Governments To Punish People They Don’t Like”

      3. bravetard said on January 9, 2024 at 1:01 pm

        Sorry Karl, comment was meant for Iron Heart since he was the one ranting about centralization. Unlike IH, you seem to read the links you post.

      4. Anonymous said on January 9, 2024 at 12:12 pm

        “The issue is definitely Mozilla’s (and all their like-minded friends) many different definitions of so called “hate speech”.”

        If you read the web of hate pdf it does define hate speech and gives specific examples.

        I agree that defining something as hate speech could be used as a back door way of censorship, but don’t mix up freedom of speech and freedom from criticism.

      5. Jody Thornton said on January 9, 2024 at 10:45 pm

        This (Thank you Anonymous)

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

We love comments and welcome thoughtful and civilized discussion. Rudeness and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please stay on-topic.
Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.