Linux has full time developers. Blender has full time developers. Lots of other projects have full time developers. They still don’t sell my data to Google.
A web browser is a very visible piece of software, relied upon by end users, businesses and governments alike. I’m sure enough people and organizations would donate their time and money to fund this, if it existed.
You said:
Again, no, that’s not true. This API is only used by sites that opt into it, and in so doing, they are disabling the normal tracking which is far more invasive.
OK, your source for this:
A full version of an in-browser attribution API will offer strong privacy protections, while providing considerable flexibility in how to measure ad performance. Our long term goal is a standardized attribution solution. We believe that a good attribution system will give advertising businesses a real alternative to more objectionable practices, like tracking, which should allow browsers to further restrict those practices.
Nowhere does it say websites are disabling other tracking methods.
It says that browsers could (maybe, in the future) restrict other methods of tracking, if this gets widespread mainstream adoption. Why are these things related exactly? Mozilla could presumably implement these tracking restrictions right now. The reason they are related in the minds and PR of Mozilla drones is that they don’t dare do this without providing an alternative for the ad industry. Their corporate overlords won’t “allow” it.
But right now, this restricts and replaces nothing, they literally are giving you vague promises about future improvements, while already collecting your data, like I said.
I will remind you that you accused others of spreading misinformation in this thread. I will accept your little mea culpa song and dance now. Gimme!
Can you imagine a world where Linux wasn’t directly getting paid by Amazon to hook all your machines up to AWS? You can’t! And how could vim possibly be developed without dropbox integration and sponsorship, that would never work. There is no way a world exists where Krita doesn’t sell all your drawings to OpenAI, how are they going to make any money?
None of these nice things could exist if they weren’t selling out their users, that’s just reality.
I can’t find this in the announcements and stuff. Where does it say that exactly?
Where does it say that? How would this be enforced?
This API instead
Instead of what? As I said, this is in addition to existing tracking, with some vague promise that if current tracking methods were banned or abandoned, this could be used instead. Except it’s not getting banned (Mozilla is not going to out-lobby Google) or abandoned (market forces prevent that), and why oh why would I want some alternative way for ad companies to get my data in that situation anyway? Let them die.
Now if another person is going to repeat this nonsense talking point, which you have picked up strait from Mozilla’s corporate PR, I’m going to lose my mind. Have some critical thinking skills. They are giving away your data right now and they give you nothing in return except a nonsense promise of a fairytale future.
Please I just want a browser that acts in the user’s interest only, does not work with Meta on adtech, and does not think it’s their duty to save the ad industry from itself.
Ah yes, the hypothetical second step, in which tracking is going to be outlawed (I’m not holding my breath), except, of course, for the third party services that do the aggregating, which will “sell” (literal quote) the aggregate data, so I guess these are by semantic sophistry not adtech companies but something else.
I’m so glad this genius “plan” can be used to justify Mozilla funneling data to adtech firms right now, because in some hypothetical future timeline this somehow can be construed with a bunch of hand-waving and misdirection to be in my interest.
How about instead we have a browser that only cares about the users, and not give a fuck about adtech? Its number one goal should be to treat adtech as hostile, and fight to ruin that whole industry.
This does not prevent regular ad tracking, this provides additional data to advertisers. It also means Mozilla is now tracking me, and then Mozilla does this “anonymizing” on their servers. I do not trust Mozilla with this data, and I don’t trust that no way can be found de-anonymize or combine this data with other data ad networks already collect.
This is not in my interest at all. This data should not be collected. The ad networks can suck it, why should I help them?
https://blog.privacyguides.org/2024/07/14/mozilla-disappoints-us-yet-again-2/
I mean general advice with potential hardware issues is remove as much hardware as possible, and see if the problem still exists. If it does, swap components one-by-one until you find the faulty component.
Since this seems to a sporadic problem, it would probably help to try find a way to trigger the problem more reliably. Maybe write a script that writes random files constantly, or something like that.
Looking at someone being tortured and your first thought is “must have done something to deserve this”. That’s fucked up.
And then you immediately tell everybody else this thought. “This guy probably deserved it!” You did not take a couple of seconds to check whether your theory is contradicted by the article. You victimized the guy again with your baseless accusation, but you did not think or care about that.
Your excuse for this? Can’t accept the IDF soldiers being ontologically evil. Yeah me neither pal, it’s a childish concept. There are actual material reasons for the cruelty. If you want to steal someone’s land, you need to drive them out, and being cruel is a tried and true method to achieve this. No need to invoke good and evil, and no need to invent your own reality.
But of course, you do not afford the same to Hamas. No elaborate theory-crafting in this instance. There you have no problem declaring them just plain evil.
What flavor evil are you?
trustworthy AI
Our initial offering will include ChatGPT, Google Gemini, HuggingChat, and Le Chat Mistral
What
They’re not the good guys browser wise, they’re just slightly less shitty than Google, which was (still is probably?) their biggest customer.
Isn’t it TSMC that’s building a factory in Arizona?
Are you talking about the claim that he endangered CIA agents? That was just some bullshit they cooked up to get him on, and I don’t think anybody even claimed that somebody actually died.
Imagine thinking exposing the CIA should be a crime, because the poor small beans CIA agents need protection. Who wouldn’t want to protect imperial blackmailers, hit men, weapons smugglers and death squad commanders?
You are the traitor for siding with the oppressor.
So that’s just a clearly factually inaccurate statement right there, makes me question the validity of the entire thing if they can’t get something that simple correct.
It is not. The article is from 2013. Back then, that linked worked and shows exactly what the article is saying: he’s the only staff member listed. That was 8 years after the founding btw.
And since the guy is clearly rich and has lots of political connections, you’d figure he’d have sued EF by now if there was anything incorrect in that article.
Oh you launched into a whole defense of working with the far-right. Figures.
Believe it or not, people on the “far right” can care about human rights too
Yeah they care about human rights when they can weaponize them to pressure or topple governments that resist exploitation. Which is what the Oslo Freedom Forum is all about.
Hmm… I wonder if living under an autocrat might have made him care about human rights and free expression.
That or he’s pissed that they took his father’s Telco empire, and now he wants to topple the Venezuelan government and get his “birthright” back. We may never know.
Also you avoided the whole part of in the article about what he was up to before the HRF. That guy was clearly an activist conservative bigot at the very least, and so he naturally evolved into a Mr. Human Rights Guy. He doesn’t just take money from far-right dipshits, he himself is a reactionary.
Who is Halvorssen? He is best known as the founder and CEO of the Human Rights Foundation, where he is listed as the lone staff member. The Oslo Freedom Forum is his brainchild, a confab he has sought to brand as “a Davos for human rights.”
Founder and only staff member is this son of a Venezuelan oligarch. Sounds like a completely normal human rights group.
The Electronic Intifada has obtained Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 990 forms filed by the Human Rights Foundation that include previously undisclosed information about its donors.
The forms show that the Human Rights Foundation received approximately $600,000 in donations from the Donors Capital Fund from 2007 through 2011. Based in Northern Virginia, Donors Capital Fund is essentially a slush fund for the cadre of rightist donors who bankroll the conservative movement.
Don’t disclose all their big donors. Kinda sus.
“Since the fund handles money from multiple donors and donors names aren’t disclosed, contributions made through the Donors Capital Fund are difficult to trace,” the Center for American Progress noted in its 2011 landmark report “Fear, Inc.” “Potential donors are required to open a minimum $1 million account to utilize the fund’s services.”
In 2009, Donors Capital Fund channeled $60 million to various conservative causes and from 2009 through 2011 a whopping $21,318,600 “to groups promoting Islamophobia,” according to the Center for American Progress.
Peter Thiel is also one of the big donors.
But a look at the early stages of Halvorssen’s career, which he spent as a conservative operative combating gay rights initiatives, feminism and multiculturalism on US college campuses, suggests otherwise.
That checks out.
The guy that organizes this is a rich Venezuelan gusano, and he gets donations from the far-right. This is not about “Challenging Power” or “Freedom”, but to further US imperialism.
Very weird, I can think of some things I might check:
It is possible that you have files on disk that don’t have a filename anymore. This can happen when a file gets deleted while it is still opened by some process. Only the filename is gone then, but the file still exist until that process gets killed. If this were the problem, it would go away if you rebooted, since that kills all processes.
Maybe it is file system corruption. Try running fsck.
Maybe the files are impossible to see for baobab. Like if you had gigs of stuff under (say) /home on you root fs, then mount another partition as /home over that, those files would be hidden behind the mount point. Try booting into a live usb and checking your disk usage from there, when nothing is mounted except root.
If you have lots and lots of tiny files, that can in theory use up a lot more disk space than the combined size of the files would, because on a lot file systems, small files always use up some minimum amount of space, and each file also has some metadata. This would show up as some discrepancy between du and df output. For me, df --inodes / shows ~300000 used, or about 10% of total. Each file, directory, symlink etc. should require one inode, I think.
I have never heard of baobab, maybe that program is buggy or has some caveats. Does du -shx / give the same results?
If you install (well more like unpack) Firefox from the official binary tarball, that will update itself.