Only after the thirsty bidet is finished with it. I've got her gushing at this point.

I’m not sure that an extension would have the necessary access to manipulate the browser like that.

I don't know if they still do but they used to have. That, however, is something to discuss with the genius decision makers at Mozilla who decide to break extension APIs every couple of years. Firefox on Android still hasn't recovered from last time.

Maybe check out LibreWolf. It's Firefox except with good defaults. Otherwise, it's exactly the same

They in the last year or so added built in vertical tabs , much better hardware support for decoding video on Linux, continue to support manifest v2 and high quality ad blocking. Have increased performance and memory usage.

In the last 7 years performance is night and day different as is multiple process performance and switched away from unmaintainable old broken addon system.

They also created one of the premiere programming languages which is making in roads in the Linux kernel.

I don't know if Vance has a strong enough following. Trump is effectively worshipped by MAGAts, not sure Vance is capable of taking over like that.

That's basically what librewolf, waterfox, and a whole bunch of others are. In the same way manjaro and endeavor etc. are opinionated arch installs with spackling, those browsers are opinionated settings-already-selected versions of firefox.

I also see an extensions.ml.enable. Anyone with actual knowledge of the source code know what those are doing?

@michaelmrose @swordgeek I 100% agree that Mozilla is important but it's also clear that currently their is not enough business to keep Mozilla going. I don't blame them for trying to make a Business , i blame them for not following their former values. You can make a business and still mostly follow values ( look for example to GOG ).
And for what i don't like is the change from opt in to opt out. Every new feature most users don't want and they know this and make it harder and harder to turn off. The last time it was hidden in a sub menu in the settings ( switching off sending data to their ad service ) now it's hidden in config:about.
I guess next time you need 3rd party patches and compile the browser yourself to switch a "feature" off.

I don't think the centralised approach works either. If you bake that grouping metadata of individual popular pages into Firefox you have an issue with keeping it current if page content changes. And you have a difficult trade-off between covering enough pages vs not blowing up the size too much. And the approach can't work for deep web pages, e.g. anything people can only see when logged in.

Ignoring all that: The groupings you could pre-process would be static and determined over some assumed average user behaviour, not an actual cluster of a specific users themes. You take some hardcore Warhammer 40k fan, and all his tabs on minis and painting techniques and rulebooks and fan media, and apply the static grouping then it all goes into "Warhammer". However if you ran it locally it might come up with "Painting" "Figures" "Rules" "Fanart" or whatever. It would produce a more fine grained clustering for someone who is deep into a specific niche interest, and a more coarse grained one otherwise.

So I think fundamentally it's correct to cluster locally and dynamically for a usable result. They need to make it opt-in, and efficient enough. Or better yet they could just abandon the idea because it's ultimately not that much use compared to the required inference cost.

It's still a way out but Ladybird might be the alternative going forward. However, they've stated that it's only going to support linux/mac with a windows version in the "eventually" column which makes it kinda hard to sell to people.

American non-profit open source browser from scratch is certainly better, still not it.

Even though I'll probably switch I follow their youtube channel. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough and all that.

Why would an organisation choose to over spend on executive salaries?

Obviously, it's because thats what it costs to get people with the right skills.

So the profit from the for-profit is passed up to the non-profit.

This is a really common organisational structure and not bizarre.

There's loads of worthy criticisms to make of mozilla but this is not one of them.

Calling whatever you like "profit" cant really be rebutted, it's subjective semantics.

Yes CEOs are paid lots of money. Why would mozilla choose to over pay staff?

This smells like BS.

Is mozilla non-profit, not-for-profit, or for-profit?

You dont really know do you.

"I dont like mozilla so ill just assume they must be profiteering assholes somehow"

"Its the vibe of the thing"

Altogether Imbecilic

I only use Firefox. I've only used Firefox since 2000.

They, by their own statements, are a 501( C )3, which is a non-profit, not a not-for-profit.

Sit down.

So, are you not understanding that other people work differently, or are you just not using that skill?

The very first five words of my message was that this was useful to some people.

I never trusted them. Who would ever set up a nonprofit owned by a for profit company if not to decieve people?

I do appreciate the Open Sourced GECKO engine, though. I like Waterfox.

This is an UI issue. You could just show them a landing Page and ask them if they want this new feature, and then it installs the extension in the background, without explicitly ask the user to go to the extension page to install something by hand.