The discourse about Mozilla is ridiculous, here and most everywhere. You’ve got people taking every perceived opportunity to attack them for things they do, things they didn’t do, and things it’s imagined they might’ve done. And then another crowd of equally determined people doggedly defending them for every idiotic blunder they make, such as this one.
Meanwhile Mozilla itself has nothing substantial to say. This is not the first time a prominent extension has mysteriously gone missing from amo with Mozilla telling us nothing about its role in the incident. @mozilla@mozilla.social needs to be in the discussion giving us a real explanation of what happened, why they got it wrong, and what they’re doing to improve things.
Correct, this two-sided discourse is due to a massive lack of communication on Mozilla’s part, leaving room for speculation.
The best I can think of is that the explainer language used to justify the extension’s removal was just boilerplate language that got copy+pasted here because someone clicked the wrong button. But even that makes a mockery of the review process.
I think “oops clicked wrong button” would be slightly more defensible, but not by much. If they truly rejected the extension for content in it that it does not have, it’s hard to see how a human could make that mistake even accidentally. But maybe there’s something I’m missing.
True in a way. However, there is a rather large collection of speculation on the Internet that is quite an undertaking to correct. And a large population of people and bots willing to speculate. Also, having once been speculated, each speculation takes on a life of its own. If it gets much more substantial, forget Skynet, we’re busy creating Specunet and its sidekick Confusionet – an insidious duo.
Yep, which further highlights the problem: @mozilla@mozilla.social 🔗 https://mozilla.social/users/mozilla/statuses/113153943609185249
We’ve made the hard decision to end our experiment with Mozilla.social and will shut down the Mastodon instance on December 17, 2024. Thank you for being part of the Mozilla.social community and providing feedback during our closed beta. You can continue to use Mozilla.social until December 17. Before that date, you can download your data here (https://mozilla.social/settings/export), and migrate your account to another instance following these instructions (https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/mozilla-social-faq).
Oh so ublock origin lite. A manifest V3 compatible adblocker for chromium browsers.
The original ublock origin is unaffected
Firefox will be adopting Manifest V3, but a modded version that enables ad blocking.
Wait, I’m confused. How are Mozilla and Firefox different? I thought what ever Mozilla decides goes…granted, I’m out of the loop.
Probably due to automatic extension reviews by Mozilla.
Sad that it happened, but at least it doesn’t impact the actual uBlock, only the lite version for which I honestly see no purpose in Firefox anyways.
It was a manual review conducted by an actual person that in the end admitted they were wrong
Agreed. Especially considering uBlock origin is pretty much the main reason to use FF at all. They shouldn’t be delegating reviews of it to someone who would fuck up this badly.
Assuming this wasn’t a “test the waters” kind of thing to determine just how much they were reliant on ublock.
I’ve been using the main FF build for a while now but I’m wondering if I should start looking at the various fork options.
Are you like, those old multi colour swirly rubber balls we used to get out of 20p machines as kids? Those were ill!
I thought that was the shit Chrome was doing to block adblockers and antimalware plugins, if Firefox is doing the same thing what browser do we use now? :-(
I don’t care about all the browser wars stuff, I lost interest when it was Netscape Vs IE, I just want a browser that I can configure fully myself and have it be as safe and secure as one can make it, within reason.
Mozilla isn’t google. They took it back and encouraged the guy to reach out in the future if any issues arise.
BFD, it’s not like they banned his account, just one gimped extension that doesn’t do the whole ad blocking experience and even then only because he didn’t do anything to try and reverse it. Then after it’s restored he throws his tantrum and removes it.
With all the extensions out there false positive detections of malicious apps are going to happen. Nobody has unlimited resources to hire boatloads of devs to review every single line of code of every extension for every update done. That’s an insane expectation.
There is fairly substantial rumor that there may be a smear campaign against firefox lately because they are still supporting manifest v2, which our owning class does not care for.
Mozilla has made their fair share of stupid decisions lately, but they are still leagues ahead of Google, Amazon, and the other FAANG-type companies in ethics and trustworthiness. Definitely something to keep a pulse on, but nothing to throw the baby out with the bathwater over. And if it really bothers you, use LibreWolf/Fennec.
That poor dev is just getting so much shit thrown their way constantly having a short temper about it makes sense. They are fighting against an entire industry to make the internet usable for people. I hope everyone who has the means to donates to support the developer
Edit: donate to block list maintainers thanks to lemmyvore below for the correction
The dev has not made available any means to donate to him directly. He asks that people donate to the maintainers of the block lists instead.
