Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)MK
Posts
4
Comments
282
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • They might simply prefer it, or be in an environment where they have no choice (e.g. office, education).

    I'm a stubborn Firefox user but I have to say, this feels a little aggressive and not at all likely to convince anyone to switch.

  • I thought that might've been the source of your misunderstanding. Sorry, that's just how I write sometimes, no deeper meaning intended. As far as I know there's no public data on what percentage of Firefox and Chrome users like their browsers' features.

  • Leaving Vivaldi was a sad moment for me. That UI, that sidebar, the settings, those features...! Goodness. I'm an avid enjoyer of bells and whistles, and Vivaldi's got all of them and then some. I miss that a bit.

    The folks working on it seem great, check their blog for their decision track record 1 2 3. Did you know they also host a mastodon instance? Literally my only issue with it is the engine, and that just so unluckily happens to be a deal breaker.

  • A lot of people don't even know it's an option, or have grown to believe that's just how the web is. When was the last time you saw adblockers in mainstream media or news?

    This is why I think it's so important to keep raising awareness. If you have people in your life who you believe would be better off using uBlock, consider bringing it up when you have the opportunity.

  • Yeah, I thought about mentioning that. But the comparison goes both ways. Less than 1% of Chrome users switching to Firefox could still mean an increase in Firefox users of over 10%, if I remember my numbers correctly. That'd be a sweet boost for most products.

  • I think some people overestimate how many will migrate to Firefox in the near future over this.

    • High switching cost compared to finding another extension (e.g. uBO Lite), even if the resulting experience is worse.
    • Just as many Firefox users like Firefox, lots of Chrome users enjoy what they have too. They don't want to lose that.
    • The kind of tech-aware person who'd switch over this is much more likely to have seen the news months ago and taken action already.

    As fun as it is to imagine an Adpocalypse shocking the masses and pushing them to try out alternatives to big tech, it's also way too optimistic, I feel.

  • Lemmy has a languages setting that might be helpful here, but I never bothered to check what it actually does. Er, sorry. Just, it could be worth looking into.

    Blocking certain country focused instances can help, too.

  • everyone ever just saying "it is not possible",

    I've definitely seen people saying they'll fail, with no arguments to back that up, and I stand with you against that kind of baseless speculation. But it's worth noting there are many folks bringing up thought-out technical disagreements with the project's decisions. Some may be more opinionated than others, but that's life.

    finding some random comments from project founder to hate.

    If you're referring to what I think you are, that's not it. People aren't chasing after random comments because they want to throw shit at Ladybird. It's called criticism. Criticism, if valid, is not the same as hate, and portraying people who bring up Andreas' actions—possibly those of most important person in the project—as one-dimensional haters is disingenuous.

    But you know what? You and your opinion is not important. People are not doing this to make Linux competitor or Mozzila competitor but to have fun and learn something new.

    But they're not? Ladybird has a fully-fledged US 501(c)(3) non-profit with clear ideals, a roadmap and even sponsors that have pledged over one million USD in funding combined (see Chris Wanstrath's post).

    Haters gonna hate, I wish them luck. Failing is ok too.

    Yes, that's true. Please don't disregard people offering valid criticism, though.

  • Where did you read me state he's a fascist, when I literally said the opposite?

    I genuinely don't think he's on Twitter because he's a "weird fascist tech bro"

    And I explained, in depth, why we can't simply reduce who someone is to their words. You need to look at their actions. Saying "look at his sweet message! How can anyone think ill of him?" is not the argument you think it is. From history books to modern media, we know countless people whose words are nice, when their actions are anything but.

    they can only interpret people that are not “with” them as “against” them.

    And to clarify “with” above means “shares my extreme views and expectations”.

    Can you tell me exactly which extreme views and expectations I expressed?

    I'll be blunt, it doesn't look like you bothered to read my entire comment before replying.

    P.S. Twitter uses their own set of emoji that are actually images instead of Unicode, and it seems you pasted the image in your comment. I suggest replacing it for 🤓 or removing it, because it's likely oversized in some Lemmy UIs.

  • That's actually interesting, I learned something new today.

    cross-platform CLI and server

    Will Ladybird compete against lynx? ...No? I tried. Jokes aside, I don't see why that'd matter much for end-users.

    It looks to me like Apple wants Swift on Linux, but that might simply be because they understand you can't run away from Linux when dealing with servers. That's not necessarily the same as wanting to create a cross-platform (read: greater than Apple and Linux) ecosystem.

  • I don't think I'm really making any of those points in isolation, but I think probably the first.

    Well, I'm off to a great start! Ha ha... This is why I ask. I assumed you'd bring up at least two, but if I couldn't even get that right, then I clearly wasn't reading your comment in the intended spirit. I was confident there was more to it.

    For what it's worth, I completely agree with you on the following, (sadly) down to the Teams mention:

    It's possible to acknowledge that I don't agree with the views of the devs while using their software, but it does create a kind of tension that I would avoid if a viable alternative existed.

    Similarly, I prefer open source software and will always seek it out and when comparing alternatives I heavily weight open source as an advantage. That said, I do still use some microsoft software (notably microsoft teams) for a variety of reasons.

    The only thing I'm unsure about is this:

    The views of devs are relevant to my decision whether or not to use whatever software, but they're not solely determinant.

    I believe it strongly depends on which views we're talking about. The problem is that while certain disagreements can be harmlessly put aside, and you may even work together with these people, at some point you'll find views that are harmful themselves. Maybe they don't hurt you directly, but they can hurt others.

    Using software and engaging in communities of developers with harmful views means platforming those views, even when you disagree. You're telling developers, "It's fine to hurt others if you're good at writing software." You're telling people it's okay for them to hurt others too, because if respected devs are allowed to, then why shouldn't they?

    For a rather extreme example, Hyprland's project lead is on record saying he could be swayed on genocide. Mind you, this is not the only issue with the project. Vaxry has been banned from the freedesktop mailing list, because they're not interested in platforming toxicity. Many have ditched Hyprland (and Vaxry) altogether, even though it's an impressive project in terms of technical achievements.

    I'm not blaming unaware users, it happens! The problem is when you become aware of an issue, and you don't speak out, don't take any action, don't support the ones being hurt. I'm not trying to order anyone to do all of those, but too many don't do a single one and are seemingly against others putting in the work.

    Look at the downvotes on my top comment: why should an attempt at informing people have its visibility lowered? They were not as kind as you to reply. Not claiming you downvoted me—nor would I mind if you did—but a -1 is hardly useful feedback to me, is it?

    If I had known the full extent of Lemmy devs' views from the start, I'm not sure I'd have joined. For most projects, once you're in, it's harder to leave than it would've been to avoid. The cost of switching isn't a shackle, but is certainly a deterrent. This is why I try to be careful about which projects I allow myself to support.

    Point being, some views are absolutely solely determining factors in me not using the software.

    And again, Lemmy and Ladybird aren't comparable in this discussion due to the fundamentally different nature of the projects and the ways in which people interact with them. I'm willing to elaborate on this, if anyone actually wants that, but this comment is long enough already.

  • I got that, but what point were you trying to make, exactly?

    For example, the following are possible non-exclusive interpretations to my perspective:

    • It's possible to use Ladybird without agreeing with Andreas' views.
    • It's possible to use any software without agreeing with developers' views.
    • It's possible to use Ladybird without supporting Andreas' views.
    • It's possible to use any software without supporting developers' views.
    • It's unnecessary to bring up Andreas' views when discussing Ladybird.
    • It's unnecessary to bring up developers' views when discussing any software.

    These may be similar and/or related, but are not the same, and so I would answer them differently.

  • Your comment convinced me to finally take a look at his profile and see what the fuss is about.

    I didn't see anything that'd make me scream fascism, either.

    But there's definitely stuff that's off. Things that, in isolation, would be one thing, but when you analyze them all together, it wouldn't be weird to say there's a pattern. A picture starts to form, and it's one that I've sadly seen many times before.

    So I went back and grabbed a few tweets:

    I barely had to scroll to find these, they're all recent. There's much more.

    Individually, you could dismiss everything. It's just humor. He's neutral. Objective. Wholesome. But then, why does he keep hitting the same keys? You'd assume a wholesome centrist would have a little more variety in their stand-up routine.

    You know what he reminds me of, after reading so many of his tweets?

    People who dress up in a veneer of positivity, but you ask them what they think is negative, and they'll say things like raising awareness of LGBT issues. Not in those words, of course, because that's not positive. When they talk about it, they'll put on this show about how they don't take sides, and how they're simply worried about the technical discussion, the actually important stuff, you know? They simply don't like unhelpful noise, things like trying to foster an inclusive community.

    It's easy to seem like a positive figure when you never properly acknowledge any criticism. Position yourself as a factual, neutral voice of objectivity, even when that's literally impossible. Paint those who disagree as non-contributing, unproductive, negative noise-makers. Say you agree with people on topics they care about, but then turn around and tell them they're all doing it wrong. Cover it all up in emoji and a "Let's do it together!" attitude, but reject anyone who reaches out with the wrong greeting.

    And there you have it, Andreas reads like a man who's either lying to himself or to others, and I don't know which is worse.

    I went into this thinking, "I have to avoid baselessly criticizing people. There's surely nuance to this man's real beliefs, people on the internet are too quick to attack without evidence." Which is why I'm honestly surprised to say that I came out with a mildly worse opinion of Andreas than when I started. What the hell.

    I sincerely hope he can reflect on his behavior and grow out of this strange mindset. Andreas seems to be a great software developer and Ladybird can be an enormous boon for the web, so it hurts to see him acting this way.


    Again, I genuinely don't think he's on Twitter because he's a "weird fascist tech bro" who likes a fascist platform (what is even meant by weird?). I find it more probable that he's comfortable there, realizes that it's not going anywhere, that it remains the most popular platform, and therefore doesn't think Mastodon is worth the effort.

    Why he's so comfortable there and doesn't like Mastodon is worth thinking about, though.