Same reason you’re not likely going to find counterfeit goods on the shelves of a Target or Costco
Everyone imitates the market leader so it really feels as if competition doesn't exist as an alternative to amazon here. They're all as bad, and sometimes worse.
Sure, but why should anyone have to?
But Firefox also needs to generate money somehow, right? A small advert to amazon/hotels/whatever that can be removed basically permanently with a small change in the settings is about the best balance I can think of.
If you donate to Mozilla, I have more sympathy for you. Perhaps they could make it so that if you have a Firefox account linked to a donation that they remove this, or something.
Is there anywhere I can donate to Firefox, specifically the development and the maintenance of the browser itself, and only the browser? Maybe donating directly to developers working on Firefox would be the best approach here.
They should have offered us monthly services that made sense. Long long ago.
WHY? They get hundreds of millions a year to place Google as the default search engine. That’s a shit ton of money. At that level they could even put some away every year for an endowment. Why does a nonprofit need to generate even more money by violating its users?
See videos 4 months old or younger: https://www.youtube.com/@Lunduke/search?query=mozilla
> The company made popular by making modular laptops now makes a desktop with soldered-on RAM. Bonus: They appear to support targeting children with Trans cartoons.
https://lunduke.substack.com/p/framework-unveils-2000-non-up...
> Leftist Extremists Leave Linux Kernel, Demand Conservatives Be Banned
> Leftist Linux developers demand those with wrong politics "be removed". "Right-wing people are not welcomed," says one. "You can [CENSORED] right off from my projects," the other.
https://lunduke.substack.com/p/leftist-extremists-leave-linu...
In this case, it seems they are neither balanced nor impartial, so beware people who chose to engage with that. It seems Lunduke is yet another culture-warrior masquerading like "The last bastion of truly independent Tech Journalism". I'm sure they get lots of traffic from it, but it's not really a reliable source for facts.
diggan, your way of thinking needs to face strong criticism. It brings you into the realm of make-belief and delusion and turns you away from the truth. Dealing with the trappings instead of the essence of things is no way to live in this world. Be level-headed and apply rationality, otherwise I predict you will see supposed enemies hiding behind every stone and then it will end badly for you.
FWIW, anyone can follow to the sources in order to come to the same summary, or through interpretation to the same conclusions. It only takes half a minute with a Web search and see that B.L. indeed is a reliable transmitter of facts. It took you longer to sow the FUD than to simply do the verification! *smh*
Here are the sources:
* https://schedule.mozillafestival.org/session/TKUXAQ-1
* https://xcancel.com/bazzite_gg/status/1887913668182163478
* https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nouveau/2025-February...
* https://chaos.social/@karolherbst#:~:text=not%20welcomed
* https://web.archive.org/web/20240619223519/https://social.tr...
You seem to want to join in into same self-deception and denial of reality. Don't do this any more, it just brings suffering.
It is a good thing that we all have the freedom to check the veracity, and do not have trust gatekeepers and do not have to short-circuit by taking anyone's word.
No, I just avoid "journalism" from people who only post with wildly emotionally charged language. If the reporting speaks for itself, you don't need to prime my feelings with your headlines or interpretations.
>Don't do this any more, it just brings suffering.
Your moralizing is tiring to read.
No it isn’t
For one, it's a continuum, not a binary thing.
Second, for topics I care about, I look at multiple outlets and/or their reported sources so that I can hopefully isolate the facts and form my own opinion.
And yes, for each outlet I weigh their reporting by how much emotionally charged language they use. Or in this case, whether they shoehorn something about trans people into an article about RAM in addition to the other emotionally charged language.
Let's be honest, they just spent the Google money like if there was no tomorrow, and an individual that won't even see from afar that much money in my whole life, I won't be donating to save them from their pitiful financial choices.
[1] https://www.mellett-architects.com/en/portfolio/mozilla/ [2] https://blog.mozilla.org/places/2013/03/27/mozilla-paris-fin...
But regardless of our feelings for Mozilla being one way or another, listening to authors who clearly are over-emotional about subjects isn't a way to learn more.
Independently of the guy's own politics (I only know his “Linux Sucks” videos), he is directly citing an official Mozilla[1] document.
[1] https://schedule.mozillafestival.org/schedule?isRecorded=tru...
It does not, professional journalists are able to provide two different points of views in their articles, granted they work for a professional publication. I'm not sure where you're from, but seemingly it isn't very popular in the US, but in other countries it does exist.
> All you're doing is filtering for people that conform to YOUR pre-conceived notions.
I'm trying to filter away people using overly emotional language, regardless of their political or moral leanings. I don't care if you're up, right, down or left, using clickbait language gives me reservations about even listening to the author.
Nonprofits are supposed to raise funds from donations and grants, not via enshittification for the primary subject of their mission.
The problem is that besides being a supposed nonprofit (Mozilla foundation), the same people also want to larp as a sillicon valley tech business (Mozzilla corp which largely shares leadership with the org) with insanely high saleries funded anti-user bullshit.
Counterfeit products sold by Amazon.
Most reviews are purchased.
Stolen product pages.
Product pages where the reviews are for totally different products
If you report any of these things to Amazon, they do nothing about it.
They have enshittified, and they don't have a quality anti-abuse team so many items, while not directly fraudulent are fraud-u-lish.
Commingled inventory means you can't expect the item you get to be the item you ordered because there is no supply chain integrity.
Honestly, after typing that out, I don't think scam was as wrong as it first seemed. I frequently feel deceived when using amazon.
FRS radios for example. Fine in the USA, not fine in Australia where those frequencies are used for public safety radio systems, and where they are illegal to possess because they don't comply with the applicable EMC standards.
To be clear, you can buy equivalent products on UHF CB frequencies locally, that you can use without interfering with ambulance services for the same price.
This is legislation that exists for a very good reason.
abusing the thing in the wrong region does.
question : why isn't this a matter of national import/export control? Why is that duty falling onto Amazon?
if Amazon was selling black-tar heroin I would have more questions than "Why is Amazon selling this? How dare they."
- Letting sellers replace listings with completely different products while keeping the ratings.
- Not providing any way to filter dodgy chinese sellers that spam search results with duplicates of the same cheap shit.
- Comingling inventory so that even if you take care to select a trustworthy seller you might get stuff from a dodgy one.
And no, being able to remove the scam ads is not good enough.
Since when is Amazon a scam site?
I don't like em' either, but hyperbole doesn't help.
For what it's worth, it can be removed in about 4 seconds.