Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
daniel://'s posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
Zorro Notorious MEB 😡

@bagder

The reality is, however, this:

1. The technology involved is lawful, and has been shown to either increase revenue, decrease costs, or both.

2. Mozilla and other browser makers are trying to do the impossible - compete with three of the largest for-profit corporations in the world: Google, Microsoft and Apple. That is an effort doomed to failure.

3. When I run across a site that doesn't work with Firefox but does work with Edge or Chrome, I have no leverage. My only option is to use Edge or Chrome. I can't get the site to fix their server or front end code, and I can file a bug report against Firefox but have no guarantee of a fix.

Mozilla will say with no sense of irony, "If a website doesn't work with Firefox, the website is broken." Firefox is still my main / default browser, but it is inevitable that enough sites will stop working with Firefox that I will be forced to switch.

15 July at 0:18 | Wall-to-wall | Open on universeodon.com
5 comments
Adrian Morales

@AlgoCompSynth @bagder I use the Samsung Internet browser made by overworked, underpaid South Korean IT engineers. 😑

15 July at 5:33 | Open on ieji.de
mcc

@AlgoCompSynth @bagder "1. The technology involved is lawful" this has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction

15 July at 5:37 | Open on mastodon.social
Zorro Notorious MEB 😡

@mcc @bagder In the US it is de facto lawful - our Congress and regulatory agencies are hobbled by corporate interests. Consumers have a bigger voice in the EU at the moment than they do here.

15 July at 16:51 | Open on universeodon.com
RAOF

@mcc @AlgoCompSynth @bagder It also has not been shown to increase revenue or decrease costs (for the advertisers, obviously the ad placement networks get money).

Worse, at least some common advertising techniques have been shown to not increase revenue. The canonical example here is a study run on eBay buying search keywords, which found that when they didn't pay to place first in the search results literally everyone who clicked the first (non-eBay) result immediately returned to the search page and clicked on the actual eBay website.

This did not change their search-result buying behaviour.

@mcc @AlgoCompSynth @bagder It also has not been shown to increase revenue or decrease costs (for the advertisers, obviously the ad placement networks get money).

Worse, at least some common advertising techniques have been shown to not increase revenue. The canonical example here is a study run on eBay buying search keywords, which found that when they didn't pay to place first in the search results literally everyone who clicked the first (non-eBay) result immediately returned to the search page...

15 July at 23:18 | Open on toot.cat
3dcandy

@AlgoCompSynth @bagder you also have to throw in that most/majority of websites are throwing more and more ads at the user these days, with the option to reduce or get rid of them totally with payments....

15 July at 8:00 | Open on mastodon.social
Go Up