this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
739 points (99.6% liked)

Selfhosted

40728 readers
497 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"the company looked at the history of social media over the past decade and didn’t like what it saw.... existing companies that are only model motivated by profit and just insane user growth, and are willing to tolerate and amplify really toxic content because it looks like engagement... "

all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 99 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

I like Mozilla, I respect their mission and their good nature. I can’t help but feel the billions they receive from Google make it too easy for them to be, at best, unfocused and, at worst, lazy. They offer a lot of random services like this. I fear this play is just chasing another possible mediocre revenue generator for them. Like pocket, like Mozilla vpn and private relay, etc.

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 81 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Maintaining a web browser is an intensely cost and time prohibitive endeavor, especially nowadays. The FOSS community can maintain a lot of things but the sheer scale of Firefox, the need for expertise, the necessary labor, it just can't be done by volunteers and donations, at least not without using Chromium. They have to get a cash infusion from somewhere.

I don't like it anymore than you do but ultimately the issue isn't Mozilla, it's the state of the technology market. Silicon Valley is no place for a non-profit organization right now, no matter how much we need it.

What we need is regulations and anti-trust, but even that may not truly save us.

They need money. That's it. That's the long and short of it.

[–] valen@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Matt@lemdro.id 22 points 1 year ago

Those donations cannot be used for Firefox development due to the structure of Mozilla.

[–] Zana@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I get paid next week and will definitely be donating, thank you for the link!

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's stopping web standards from being made simple or unchanging enough for a smaller project to maintain a functional web browser?

[–] SpaceScotsman@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At this point the web is about as complex as an operating system in terms of complexity. That needs really strong specific standards in order for it to work, and in turn projects like web browsers are huge and complex.

If someone wanted to build a web browser that only followed the simpler parts of the specifications, it wouldn't work for many websites* and people would not use that browser.

*Whether or not sites need to be so complex is another question entirely, but the reality right now is that they are

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Occasionally when I do web stuff I look into the big frameworks but quickly get overwhelmed and go back to simple html/css/js, so yeah I kind of just don't get what the point is or why anyone needs or wants complexity there. Large websites always do most stuff serverside anyway it seems, so where is this complexity even getting used? It is very mysterious to me. Suspect Google etc. are pushing stuff no one needs in this regard as well to move the web towards something only they can handle.

[–] dan@upvote.au 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

simple html/css/js,

There's a very large number of DOM and browser APIs now though... Even with basic JS without libraries or frameworks, you can still build fancy 2D and 3D graphics (WebGL), interact with USB devices, allow input via game controllers, stream H264 video, implement custom caching, use push notifications, and a bunch of other things. The web browser has to implement all of that complexity. They're all useful in different scenarios.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

That's a good point, I guess I haven't been too aware of all that stuff.

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This seems like a reasonable and insightful take. Is there a way a non-profit could still survive in silicon valley? For ex, IETF isn't a profit focused organization.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if this qualifies exactly but the FOSS 3D package Blender has been surviving for quite some time. They're in Amsterdam, not silicon valley, but they seem to do really well off primarily donations and funding from some big companies.

[–] IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the key there is funding from big companies. There's tons of standards and the like in which big companies take part - both in terms of code and financial support. Big projects like the rust compiler, the Linux kernel, blender, etc. all seem to have a lot of code and money coming in from big companies. Sadly there's only so much you can get from individuals - pretty much the only success story I know of is the wikimedia foundation.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I may be wrong but I thought they were majority user funded.

edit: looking at their funding reports it seems that way, but I may be misinterpreting it.

[–] IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wikimedia foundation is, none of the other things I listed are.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I meant Blender, they seem to be majority funded by regular people.

[–] IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I just checked their financial report for 2022 and it looks like 50% came from patron funding (which looks like entirely companies like Google), 5% from epics grant, and then 10% corporate membership. 20% came from individuals, and the rest from random other miscellaneous things like the blender market. If you search blender foundation annual report 2022, the finances breakdown will be near the end of the slides.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ahh, that was just me misunderstanding what patron meant, my bad.

It looks like on blender's website there's 6 entities on there, and one of them does seem to be an individual fwiw. Here's his website: https://aras-p.info/.

The rest all seem to be corporations though - meta, aws, some game company I've never heard of, AMD, and epic.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

I hope they hit on something stand-out soon. To establish more sustainability. Seems like everything is in change right now.

[–] Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Would be great if they did not get money from google. They could set.up a donations program or something and regularly ask for it like Wikipedia. Donation based browser, peoples Browser.

[–] krakenx@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You can donate to Mozilla, and I do. https://donate.mozilla.org/en-GB/

A lot of people will have to donate a lot to equal the amount they are getting from Google though, and if Google pulls that money I feel that Firefox would end before people donate enough to make up the shortfall.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

Money donated to Mozilla goes o ly ti the foundation. The money paid by Google goes to the Mozilla Corp (Firefox).

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Asking for a donation would be a damn near fatal blow to retention and they know it. Given how its going with Google's anti-trust case though, they'll need to ask for money at some point.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

I feel like this relationship of: one company pays a competitor to promote an unrelated product that could very reasonably be used to engage in anti-competitive behavior should at the very least be heavily regulated by the SEC, or possibly just outright prohibited. Alphabet is the epitome of the mega-corporation who has the resources to compete viciously in almost any industry, but has the breadth for plausible deniability about who their competition is.

"What? Mozilla isn't competition...browser? Oh you mean chrome? That little thing? Nah, we just do that on the side. We're an ad company."

Meanwhile: "What? Meta? You mean like Facebook? We don't compete with them, hah, remember Google+? They compete with TikTok...Oh ads? I guess so, but that's kind of a side thing. We do mobile os/web analytics/email/whatever."

[–] sudafossil@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah revenue generator... They want a full name to get on the wait list, no reason for that except marketing.

[–] Leax@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They're a bit late to the party, but better late than never...

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 year ago

not really social media is basically booming right now with the implosion of twitter

[–] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Better Nate than lever.

[–] Kushan@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We desperately need a company like Mozilla to take the reigns of something like Lemmy. The original developers are far too biased and short sighted to see the bigger picture, it needs to be an independent group that promotes more open source development.

[–] AdmiralShat@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I've considered leaving Lemmy because of who is in charge of development right now. They were not ready for its sudden burst in popularity and are not handling it well.

Time for a repo fork?

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Where do you get that from? I have no love for tankies, but from what I've seen, they've built a product that's free of their biases, opensourced it and thrown it over the wall with no strings attached.

If you want to make a rooten-tooten white supremacist nazi instance with Lemmy, you can do exactly that. Nobody has to federate with you, and you don't have to federate with them.

Strange take.

[–] spaduf@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Strange take.

Not for folks who have been following the development. It’s one thing if it’s just a couple of devs working on the project and trying their best, it’s an entirely different thing when a couple of devs are shutting out large numbers of contributors (frequently subject matter experts which they desperately need at this point) over relatively trivial issues. It's become a pattern and will almost certainly continue. At this point a significant number of users have been lost because the devs have been largely unable to capitalize on previous waves on growth due to slow development. Because of all this Lemmy has an awful reputation even among the rest of the fediverse and particularly among people who have tried to contribute. A fork would probably be a significant improvement as far as brand perception goes.

[–] deus@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It seems to me they're saying Lemmy needs corporate backing to grow? Cause if they were so bothered by the opinions of the Lemmy devs they could simply use Kbin instead.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well that or use an instance that isn't theirs, or doesn't even federate with theirs, or simply block theirs.🤔 I mean this is really throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I have no strong love for leninists/stalinists, and think they accomplish little other than making actual socialists look bad while not being socialist themselves. But I'm not that put off by them. They're generally fairly intellectually weak, and easy to maneuver around. Should you choose to interact with them.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They are talking about the people developing lemmy, not some petty fight with the admins of one specific instance.

[–] deus@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Lemmy devs have no power over instances they do not run themselves.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Other than writing the software that all of those instances use to stay up to date and in contact with each other, regardless of their federation status.

[–] unnecessarygoat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

can't people just take the lemmy source code and make their own version of the lemmy api?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 year ago

I hope there instance doesn't get really big. That would be a recipe for disaster especially since they don't seem to have a plan to financial stability

[–] Destraight@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So it's moza?