Mozilla's decline is an unstoppable process. Last year we signed the Pact for Gender Equality in Colombia, an agreement that symbolizes the co-responsibility of around XNUMX organizations with the implementation of actions that contribute to reducing inequalities. i wrote about how political correctness replaced technical excellence as a goal, and the events of the past week destroyed all my hopes that things would change.
I'm going to make the usual clarification. This is not a post for or against a certain politician. It is a post in favor of the principles with which the web was born.
Mrs. Baker's Ministry of Truth
Mitchell Baker is the president of the Mozilla Foundation and the top executive of its commercial arm the Mozilla Corporation. On the Foundation's official blog, wrote:
… Of course, the question of when a head of state should be banned is a critical one, among many others that must be addressed. When should platforms make these decisions? Is that decision-making power only yours?
So far we are doing fine. Except for one detail. Platforms shouldn't be able to ban anyone permanently until cleared by a judge.
But as reprehensible as Donald Trump's actions are, the rampant use of the internet to foment violence and hatred and reinforce white supremacy is about more than just a personality. Donald Trump is certainly not the first politician to exploit the architecture of the Internet in this way, and he will not be the last. We need solutions that don't start after untold damage has been done.
Note that Mrs. Baker says nothing about the black tweeters calling for violent retaliatory actions against whites or the hateful message from women who consider every heterosexual male to be a rapist.
Your post continues
Changing these dangerous dynamics requires more than just the temporary silencing or permanent removal of bad actors from social media platforms.
Additional precise and specific actions must also be taken:
Let's see what those measurements are.
- Inform who pays for the ads, how much they pay and to whom they are directed.
- Make the platform's algorithms public so that you know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.
- Activate by default the tools that warn about false information.
- Work with independent researchers in the study of the impact of platforms on people and our societies.
I know of a couple of dictatorships who were sure to approve of Mrs. Mitchell's "transparency measures." On the other hand, what is the criterion to determine that something is false?
I had a crazy idea. What if we better educate people so that they know how to distinguish it for themselves?
The decline of Mozilla And how are we doing at home?
So far, Baker's ideas may be debatable, if well-intentioned. But eLet's take a look at the work you are being paid for with Google's generous contributions to the Foundation.
At general market is comfortable third behind Chrome and Apple
Chrome: 63,38%
Safari: 19.25%
Firefox: 3.77%
The newcomer Edge already has 3.08%
In the growing market for mobile devices, things are getting worse. On both tablets and mobiles, Firefox is the least used browser and does not reach 1%.
Well, you say. At least Mrs. Baker will be great with her employees. Let's see:
Not only did he manage to lay off 250 employees during the pandemic (as Internet use grew) he also announced a restructuring that nowhere spoke of reducing executive compensation.. This is a graph of the evolution of compensation to executives and that of market share in 2018.
To end. a minor detail, but one that illustrates the double discourse.
Last year they posted this:
Facebook has a big problem with hate speech and misinformation on its platform. Despite groups calling on him to take action, including Mozilla, he has yet to make changes.
But Facebook has an Achilles heel: 99% of its $ 70 billion in revenue comes from advertisers.
We're calling on Mozilla's peers - tech companies and companies heavily reliant on the Internet for their core business - who are among the top Facebook advertisers to get their ads off Facebook including Amazon, Uber, Samsung, Disney, and Apple.
We need your help to encourage them to join the growing movement against hate speech and misinformation online. Can you tweet telling companies to join #StopHateForProfit?
Take a look at the screenshot of their latest newsletter.
While launching a campaign to boycott democratically elected presidents (like it or not) the Mozilla Foundation proposes measures that will allow dictatorships to persecute opponents. MWhile complaining about social networks, they encourage their users to use them and are very careful to encourage the use of open source alternatives that guarantee privacy and net neutrality.
Of course, from the looks of it, neither of the two things interest Mozilla anymore.
It is true that censorship must come from a judge, and never from a private organization.
But the comment of BLM and the «femina * is» seems to me out of tune, more typical of
a follower of UHBE or Alvise Perez,
Compare a seditious president with twitterers don no one,
or with alleged women who say that all men are rapists (in my life I have heard this, and if it exists, they will be as numerous as those who say that aliens rule us) seems to me an unfortunate comment.
Nor has it condemned the entire series of global injustices, but they are talking about a
current case, very serious, that does not allow comparisons.
It is true that Thrump is a democratically elected president, but just as true it is that
has allegedly committed rebellious and seditious acts that are likely to have repercussions on
legal consequences.
For me he is a Nazi, but he must be silenced by court order.
Well, little internet you consume. There are lots of tweeters saying atrocities, even a local police chief in Mallorca dropped many pearls and explained how to kill men. No account was closed. And no, they are not 4 cats, they are many indoctrinated. Just as there are many Trumpistas.
The macho who votes for Vox likes this article.
Pepito, the comment on feminazism or the BLM does have a lot of reason to be and shows the double standards of current journalism and the way it manipulates information.
1º We have been witnessing this last half year to violent demonstrations that have set fire and destroyed several entire cities, have besieged cities and have produced dozens of murders carried out by BLM, using the death of a man in police custody. The scenes have been really terrifying and the media has not stopped repeating that they were peaceful demonstrations, that they were doing the right thing. Some who now tear their clothes even came to support the use of violence in search of "good."
2º In 2018, a huge ultra-feminist demonstration headed towards the Capitol with the intention of assaulting it, with publication on the networks and with the intention of paralyzing the appointment of a Supreme Court judge appointed by Trump. They ended up invading a building of the Senate and reached the central hall of the same Senate. 300 people arrested.
I put two links to two different newspapers, one on the left and the other on the right:
https://elpais.com/internacional/2018/10/05/actualidad/1538693436_854290.html
https://www.outono.net/elentir/2021/01/07/izquierdistas-asaltaron-el-senado-de-eeuu-en-2018-asi-fueron-las-reacciones-entonces/
Here the protesters are demonstrating for peace, they are activists and there is no trace of "insurrection", "assault on the senate" or anything like that. It is the double yardstick of the media. And the most interesting thing, you will not have seen this news compared to what the Kaffirs who have stormed the Capitol have starred in.
Regarding your comment on whether Trump is a Nazi or not, I simply refer you to review the ESO notes. You may be surprised and totalitarianism is closer to your ideas than to the Trumpian ones.
It's as if executives and investors concerned about the rising trend of progressive, feminist, and lgbtqia + movements had to hire the most progressive but résuméed woman they could find to be CEO of Mozilla. Perhaps if we investigate more who that woman is, everything makes more sense, coming from a company like Mozilla that worried a few years ago about net neutrality and privacy towards this kind of absurd statements, something extreme must have happened internally within the company .
I thought the same. They fired Brendan Eich, the creator of Javascript and Brave for putting a thousand dollars in the campaign against gay marriage and from there they are plummeting
The decline of Mozilla I do not know, but that of your articles if. The logic to attack that woman is nowhere to be found.
This is the last time I follow this website.
Look, they're idiots, huh. Just find out, to know that Mitchell Baker is at Mozilla from the beginning, she was the attorney who wrote the first manifesto and who worked at Netscape.
If you think that a person's decisions are the only ones that influence the use of a browser ... and, they don't seem to be very smart.
On the other hand, you demand consistency, but I don't see that this site is called gnu-linuxadictos, ask Stallman what he thinks about the same.
Lawyer?
The prosecution rests.
The decisions of the highest authority determine the objectives and the allocation of resources of an organization. And, that affects the products
Mitchell Baker has been with Mozilla since its inception. So no, they did not seek her out for that, in fact she is the brain behind many of the decisions for years, even those on which you may agree.
Their statements have no direct effect on the drop in use of Firefox. It surprises me that coming from free software they think that this has more influence than the monopolistic practices of some companies, or how difficult it can be for a web browser to gain space when the two major phone operating systems come with their browsers included.
So I suppose that Mitchell's ideological vision bothers them more, more than how Firefox works.
On the other hand, it always says linux, if it were consistent they should write GNU / Linux
I can't believe the voxist disgust this article oozes. To want to put politics and technology aside, you have screwed up the blog that is delightful.
You say this: "Platforms shouldn't be able to ban anyone permanently until cleared by a judge."
I ask you a question, do you know how judicial systems work? Determining whether someone is taking advantage of free speech to promote hate speech can take weeks. During that time, tragedies can occur, not to mention that the judicial system of any country would collapse with so many cases to solve.
Before social networks, people organized demonstrations, attacks and coups.
And, in any case, the solution is to improve the judicial system, not to give a businessman the option to decide for the whole of society.
What people have to do is contribute more to the mozilla project, such as making small donations so that it continues to be a 100% secure browser compatible with linux systems and less complain and say nonsense about politics and that crap that is useless nothing pussy !!!
What a brother-in-law you are, not being able to distinguish between the structural violence of those who hold power to perpetuate it and continue to subject minorities and the one they exercise to defend themselves when they are desperate. Equating Hitler's violence with that of the resistance. A good brother-in-law of vox is what you are. Sure you think that today women have already achieved equality, but people like you opposed the divorce law more than four decades ago, when women could not even open a bank account or had to ask their husbands for permission to be able to work. It is a thing of the past but no one gave these advances, they were achieved by organized women in the feminist movement, the same women that you try to denigrate by comparing them to Nazism. You speak of freedom when it comes to computing but you are nothing more than a reactionary, I appreciate that you have removed your mask to be able to get out of the group of a facade with lambskin.
Good grief, what an indoctrination you have on you.
The truth is that I kept the mozilla browser and had a good image of their fight for free code, but the politically correct and radicalized progressivism in the big tech companies in the US rages and causes fear. That this lady defends the censorship of half a country and the current president of the United States is outrageous, but that she also advocates, and this is worst of all, for implementing information control measures that decide what is true or no and the publication of user data on what is consumed on the network are typical of future totalitarians and distopics.
A very interesting article, of course. Greetings.
Thank you very much
ACCOMMODATING ... I still can't believe I came across this fucking garbage on a website dedicated to GNU / Linux.
Don't we have enough fascists in Spain?
Now do we import them from Argentina?
Oh Diego.
It is essential to take space away from the Nazis, so it is okay to ban Trump.
It is essential to stop racism, that is why defense actions must be taken against any attack.
It is not that all heterosexual men are rapists, it is that the structure rewards actions that make women and the feminine less.
What dictatorships do you know that approve transparency measures? How is it that having information about how algorithms work does not help to decide?
The criterion for determining that something is false is usually whether or not there is evidence to support it.
As a suggestion, you should be more critical of your writing, thinking, and way of arguing.
Like you, the Nazis were clear about what was right and what was wrong.
Democrats like the founding fathers of the United States were not so clear on this, so they established counterweights and safeguards.
I suppose that you will continue writing this type of article regardless of the opinion of the people, radical or not. You get involved with sensitive topics where your little empathy emerges and the same radicalism that critics and with which they criticize you, so you are not very different either. You judge everyone by a few, but I hope they never rape a woman in your close circle, but in case it happens I don't think you will go so far as to say that all men are rapists but at least you can develop your empathy a bit.
The truth is that you win several that they eliminate you from their feed, but I suppose that with those who remain and who share your same opinion, it is enough and more than enough for you to move on.
May you do well sincerely and above all I hope you gain a little more empathy.
let me see if I understand, you say that allowing people to express themselves freely is fascism?
One is waiting for a technical or at least commercial analysis adjusted to the future perspective and one finds oneself in a political tantrum, which could well be expressed in a space dedicated for that purpose, not in this one. Painful analysis.
I did the technical analysis last year
https://www.linuxadictos.com/mozilla-se-sigue-equivocando-necesitamos-un-mejor-navegador-no-correccion-politica.html
https://www.linuxadictos.com/mozilla-me-da-la-razon-y-anuncia-un-nuevo-enfoque.html
https://www.linuxadictos.com/la-reestructuracion-de-mozilla-se-conocieron-mas-detalles.html