frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

These states are America's worst for quality of life in 2025

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/14/americas-worst-places-quality-of-life-top-states-for-business.html
2•KnuthIsGod•5m ago•0 comments

Empirical evidence of LLM's influence on human spoken communication

https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.01754
1•pseudolus•6m ago•0 comments

Fetterman Law

1•FettermanLaw•8m ago•0 comments

Software-defined radio can derail a US train by slamming the brakes on remotely

https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/14/train_brakes_flaw/
1•pseudolus•8m ago•0 comments

Obesity more likely caused by high calorie diet than lack of exercise

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2025-07-obesity-high-calorie-diet-lack.html
1•pseudolus•14m ago•0 comments

How to Prepare for a Disaster

https://www.popsci.com/environment/how-to-prepare-for-a-disaster/
1•domofutu•17m ago•0 comments

Trump unveils $70B AI and energy plan at summit with oil and tech bigwigs

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/15/trump-ai-oil-energy-summit
1•andsoitis•19m ago•0 comments

Zigwin32

https://github.com/marlersoft/zigwin32
1•90s_dev•22m ago•1 comments

Show HN: MCP server, natural language as code, as infra

https://github.com/zilliztech/zilliz-mcp-server
1•Fendy•23m ago•0 comments

Scientist Proved Paradox-Free Time Travel Is Possible

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a65383286/student-says-paradox-free-time-travel-is-possible-study/
1•Bluestein•24m ago•0 comments

Ani's Character Profile in Grok

https://twitter.com/techdevnotes/status/1944739778143936711
1•Bluestein•26m ago•0 comments

My reality: Decades of experience, seeking one team that believes in it

1•adan_caldera•28m ago•0 comments

China's success in cleaning up air pollution may have accelerated global warming

https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/5400165-china-air-pollution-climate-change-global-warming-study/
1•mhga•30m ago•0 comments

What is the difference between useEffect and componentDidMount in React?

1•fullstackprep•34m ago•0 comments

Whisper API hallucinating on empty sections

https://community.openai.com/t/whisper-api-hallucinating-on-empty-sections/93646
1•Bluestein•35m ago•0 comments

Some Thoughts on Learning

https://wecu.bearblog.dev/some-thoughts-on-learning/
4•veerbhatia•40m ago•0 comments

Reddit at 20: A Look Beyond the Upvotes

https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2025/07/reddit-at-20-a-look-beyond-the-upvotes.html
2•thunderbong•42m ago•0 comments

Veracity bonds: Staking real cash to post the truth

https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.09972
2•lbxa•43m ago•2 comments

Run LLM Agents as Microservices with One-Click Deployment

https://agentainer.io/
5•cyw•47m ago•5 comments

Another High-Profile OpenAI Researcher Departs for Meta

https://www.wired.com/story/jason-wei-open-ai-meta/
5•mfiguiere•52m ago•0 comments

AI creeps into the risk register for America's biggest firms

https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/15/sec_risk_factors_ai/
6•DocFeind•1h ago•0 comments

Tilck: A Tiny Linux-Compatible Kernel

https://github.com/vvaltchev/tilck
14•chubot•1h ago•0 comments

Beat the 3D Level Design Blank Page by Starting from 2D

https://saarraz.substack.com/p/the-wrap-around-method
1•saarraz1•1h ago•0 comments

Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-1-1-1-1-incident-on-july-14-2025/
18•nomaxx117•1h ago•0 comments

Automating Dependabot PR Merges with CI/CD

https://michaelbastos.com/blog/automating-dependabot-pr-merges-with-cicd
1•mbastos•1h ago•1 comments

A distributed systems reliability glossary

https://antithesis.com/resources/reliability_glossary/
3•jasonthorsness•1h ago•0 comments

How far can reasoning models scale?

https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-far-can-reasoning-models-scale
2•Mehuleo•1h ago•0 comments

Lead GrapheneOS developer was forcibly conscripted into a war

https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114825492698412916
2•pabs3•1h ago•1 comments

G-O-A-L Goals in English football

https://blog.engora.com/2025/07/g-o-l-goals-in-english-football.html
1•Vermin2000•1h ago•1 comments

Ask HN: Is anyone using Super Grok Heavy for code?

7•rickcarlino•1h ago•2 comments
Open in hackernews

Where's Firefox going next?

https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/where-s-firefox-going-next-you-tell-us/m-p/100698#M39094
123•ReadCarlBarks•7h ago

Comments

Animats•6h ago
Not going compute-bound for two minutes after launch, while not displaying pages?
blahaj•6h ago
Android?
Animats•6h ago
No, Linux. I don't know what it's doing in there. Lots of disk I/O. Clearing the "startup cache" can help.
quesera•6h ago
My guess: something is seriously borked in your profile. Easy to test.

I have run Firefox on Linux for decades (and a few extensions, and metric gobs of tabs), with zero cases of the behaviour you describe.

ASalazarMX•6h ago
Same here, vanilla Firefox snap on Ubuntu. If anything, Firefox with hundreds (literally) of tabs starts way faster than Chrome with 10, thanks to lazy its loading. RAM usage has always been stellar in Firefox, in my experience.

Maybe their distro has a broken Firefox package, they messed with the default installation, have too many extensions, or malware? A slow mechanical disk?

arp242•3h ago
Maybe try creating a new profile? I've had cases where a profile can cause Weird Shit™ to happen. Kind of annoying though. Probably something in a SQLite database or some such, but I didn't have the interest to track it down.
hcs•1h ago
Not sure if it will help but about:processes might give some more info about what is causing the activity.
dralley•24m ago
Dude, I have literally 4,000 tabs (not a joke), and my Firefox is fully loaded on boot after only a couple of seconds.

Something is wrong with your system.

jjordan•6h ago
It would be great if they restored the `Smart Bookmarks` feature they removed a number of years ago. Smart Bookmarks were fantastic. Add your favorite sites' RSS feeds to your bookmark toolbar and you'd have all the recent headlines from all your favorite sites at one click. Fortunately I wasn't the only one that appreciated this long neglected feature so someone created Livemarks (https://github.com/nt1m/livemarks/) that mostly replicated its functionality, but it's not quite the same as having native support for them.
deanc•6h ago
I want nothing more now from Firefox than iterative performance improvements across all platforms and adherence to web standards. That’s it. Let extensions handle all the other crap.
Scramblejams•6h ago
Agreed! I stuck with Firefox for a long time, but within the last year moved to Brave because too many sites were breaking. To your list I'd add "adblock," though, because it seems like extension standards are converging on a point where that's more effectively scaffolded inside the browser.
rtpg•6h ago
Tbh I disagree, the official vertical tab support is so nice and less janky than any of the extensions I used that had this functionality

After opening FF while previously using Arc for a while I was super happy with the usability improvements (that don’t seem to have impacted older workflows fortunately… big fan of how FF makes it easy to customize the toolbar etc)

dns_snek•6h ago
I've tried the new vertical tabs and I'm not a fan, it's very primitive compared to my favorite vertical tab extension Sideberry.
asadotzler•4h ago
I'll wager most users are happy with primitive over advanced.

For example, I sometimes run with hundreds of tabs and my wife has many thousands, at all times. My needs and hers are very different from typical users who have single digits numbers of tabs open, heavily biased toward the low end.

Of course I would prefer TST or Sideberry, but I'm not like most users. For most users, the Firefox experience is superior to Sideberry for its ease of use and fewer failure modes.

Centigonal•4h ago
I tried Tree-style tabs and Sidebery, and I bounced off of both. The new native vertical tabs feature works for me, and it is the most impactful feature they've shipped in years for my particular firefox experience.
csmantle•3h ago
I kind of prefer TST since it's tree style. The native vertical tabs is flat, but I would like to organize my tabs more hierarchically.
c0nducktr•2h ago
What do you like about the native vertical tabs which was not present in tree style tabs or Sidebery?

To me, what they shipped seemed lacking in features to both, with no real improvements.

ocdtrekkie•6h ago
I really have to emphasize that browser extensions are a terrible security nightmare and generally speaking, should be avoided at all costs. I understand they're fun and convenient, but it's one of those things that really doesn't age well into our modern cybersecurity issues.
RandomBacon•6h ago
I only stick with the "recommended" extensions that are reviewed by Firefox.
labster•4h ago
Running a browser without an adblock extension is an even worse cybersecurity issue, since tracking online is so extensive. I live in a country where the government routinely buys surveillance data from data collection companies to spy on us. But even if you don’t live in the US, it’s still a good thing to protect your privacy.
ocdtrekkie•3h ago
This sort of used to be true and mostly isn't today. Firefox and Edge both have reasonably good tracking prevention features. They rival Privacy Badger in effectiveness (it's largely moot these days), and the only thing between tracking prevention and ad blocking is that the latter also focuses on protecting your poor innocent eyes from advertising, which I mostly couldn't care less about if the tracking is being defeated.

I think if you are extremely narrowly scoping well-trusted ad blockers, you may be okay, as long as you understand you are trusting the ad blocker with your banking info. But it would be far better for a browser to include capabilities in first-party and eradicate extensions altogether.

A Pihole is also far safer than an adblock extension, because it can't see your decrypted your web traffic the way a browser extension can.

molticrystal•6h ago
Yes, Firefox should focus on being a lean mean machine, with the caveat that it returns to exposing its API and making it easily accessible for anyone who wants to go beyond that principle of leanness at the expense of speed or memory.

I’d even go so far as to say that extensions should have full control over Firefox again. They shouldn’t have to wait 20 years for a tray icon on minimize feature to be added or require external apps to add that feature on certain operating systems. Min2Tray existed. They should have the ability to completely alter the UI to make it function however you want. For example, the old search was great for keyboard users. A couple of strokes and you could switch search engines to site specific ones. Now it takes dozens. And when they all have the same icon, it is a painful experience. There was even at one point an add-on to restore that functionality. All this should be exposed.

The extension and plugin infrastructure didn’t die. It was killed! If security is a concern, just add more warning cones and blood red messages.

mccr8•4h ago
In my personal opinion, while the flexibility of the old XUL addons was amazing, the two big issues are compatibility and performance.

Compatibility: these addons could be broken very easily because they could depend on almost anything, and with the monthly release cycle, it is very difficult for mod authors to keep up. For instance, some addons would work by taking a core browser function written in JS, convert it to a string, run a regular expression to edit the string, then use eval to create a new function to replace the old one. In some release, the syntax of the "convert a function to a string" output changed slightly and it broke these addons, because it broke the regexp they were using.

Performance: XUL addons could do all sorts of things that are horrible for performance, and there was no real way for a user to tell what was causing it, because the addon wasn't isolated in any way. I ran into somebody who was having severe performance issues because the browser was generating colossal amounts of garbage for no reason. It eventually turned out that on a whim they'd installed a "LaTeX the World" addon, which would look for LaTeX typesetting instructions on pages and replace it with the nice looking output. The problem was, the way it worked was that every 10 seconds or so it would convert the entire contents of every single tab you had open into a zillion strings, search those strings, then throw them out.

ameliaquining•4h ago
The problem isn't security per se, it's compatibility. Exposing all the browser internals to extensions means that all the internals are part of the platform's public API and it's almost impossible to change anything. A lot of HN users will be like "that's fine, software should be finished, I don't want any more features", but things like performance and especially security require ongoing maintenance. The particular thing that killed off Firefox's old extension model was that it blocked migration to a multi-process architecture, which was clearly necessary even at the time and became even moreso when Spectre showed up a couple years later. "Warning cones and blood red messages" do not solve this because a vulnerable architecture exposes all users to exploitation, not just those who choose to use sketchy extensions.

(Also we know from long experience that "warning cones and blood red messages" don't in practice suffice to prevent end users from being exploited, but that's a separate issue.)

arp242•3h ago
It should also be pointed out that the Firefox devs spent years and countless dev hours trying to keep the old extension system and solve the problems wrt. multi-process, security, performance, and compatibility. They removed the extension system only after they tried everything else, and mostly failed.

They also spent tons of effort explaining the background of these choices and why they felt they had no choice and this was the only path forward. It's disappointing people are still coming up with this "oh, why don't they just [..]?!" type stuff.

halJordan•5h ago
You don't want that though. Nobody wants that. Browsers have been nothing but edge-case handlers since servers figured out they could segment by user-agent, and users realized they could lie about their agent.
slightwinder•4h ago
Then they should improve the ground for addons too. Add more API, more abilities. I'm still waiting for Firefox improving the shortcut-handling, gaining back the level we once had with extensions like vimperator. How long is this now? 8 years of broken promises?
qiqitori•3h ago
The concept of "web standards" is odd because new "standards" keep getting added. And what's more, they're being added rather promiscuously by an entity with almost unlimited resources, who is also the primary competitor. ;)
ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7•2h ago
Mozilla is a founder of WHATWG and they have, historically, had opinionated takes on standards.

https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions

zdragnar•2h ago
That's literally the process. TC39 in particular requires two real world implementations to exist before some new feature becomes a formalized part of the standards.

Several proposals backed by "the primary competitor" failed to get through the process, or were radically changed to make other implementors happy.

v5v3•6h ago
Made a comment, it then asked me to sign up and couldn't be bothered.

The comment was: make the Firefox containers work in private mode.

In Safari private mode. Each tab has no knowledge of another (e.g. log into Gmail and then open a new tab and go to Gmail and you won't be signed in).

Firefox doesn't have this tab level isolation.

Also offer equivalent of safari's lockdown mode. So images and site features capable of loading malware etc are blocked by default.

acheong08•6h ago
> The comment was: make the Firefox containers work in private mode.

My solution to this is having multiple Firefox profiles where the default one clears all history/cache/etc automatically upon closing (default in Librewolf). It's not technically private mode so containers work.

weikju•6h ago
temporary containers [0]

> disposable containers which isolate the data websites store (cookies, storage, and more) from each other

Granted, they're not in private broswing mode just normal mode, but same effect

[0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...

v5v3•5h ago
Yes, that's the one I want fixing, and possibly moving from extension to feature.

Why would you create a privacy tool, and then not offer it in private mode. Makes no sense.

(You can setup Firefox so it's permanently in Private Mode and clears history and data on exit - as per Libre comment above -,which is how I have it set)

CjHuber•5h ago
I might be the only one but I'm quite annoyed that Safari's incognito mode works like this. I WANT it to have knowledge of all the other incognito tabs of the same window. Only when I make a new incognito window, it should be a new container.

Pretty interesting how preferences can vary, because this bothers me everytime I use incognito mode on safari and think, can this not just work like in Firefox.

v5v3•5h ago
In the old days logging in twice would bother me as is have to type in a password, but now with password manager and fingerprint/face scan it's low effort.

It's very handy for sites where you may have more than account

wkat4242•3h ago
> It's very handy for sites where you may have more than account

For that Firefox's container tabs are a much handier option as you can stay logged in and also open new tabs that are already logged in. It has colours to tell apart which tab is part of which container

lxgr•2h ago
On desktop OSes, I definitely also prefer that behavior. I wonder if Safari behaves like that for consistency with iOS, where there isn't any hierarchy above tabs, so it would be a choice between no separation at all or sandboxing each tab individually?
GuB-42•4h ago
I actually prefer it the way it is now. For me, private mode is effectively an extra temporary profile that is full featured, but wiped once the last window is closed. I usually don't need more than one.

But I understand that other people have other needs. It can be very useful for developers for instance. Make it an option, maybe.

kevincox•3h ago
I see both. I wouldn't want every tab to be separate but I occasionally want to have more than one independent private profile at a time. It would be nice if I could do this. Any sort of ephemeral container tabs option would probably satisfy this option and could maybe even remove most of my use of private browsing if I could just open ephemeral containers in an otherwise regular window.
xeonmc•3h ago
How about per-window private sessions?
kevincox•3h ago
That would be limiting if I can't have multiple windows of one private session. (Although admittedly this is something I do quite rarely)
eddythompson80•3h ago

     firefox --profile $(mktemp -d) --private-window

or wrap it to delete the temp dir after firefor process exits.
joshuaturner•54m ago
A "private tab" feature in addition to "private window" could be a useful, if potentially confusing
wslh•3h ago
Shameless, deprecated plug: I built a very hackish Firefox extension to do that about 17 years ago [1].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EBkB-Yp-zM

sneilan1•6h ago
How about fix copy and paste on Linux?
quesera•6h ago
Hm. Are you referring to the bracketed paste weirdness? This is fixable.

https://superuser.com/questions/1532688/pasting-required-tex...

ac29•3h ago
I cant think of a single time ctrl-v or middle click didnt work
charcircuit•6h ago
Firefox has search based discover of content on the web, but it has failed to keep up with the trend of discovery using recommendation feeds. Firefox should be able to recommend new web pages I would be interested in.
csmantle•2h ago
No, thanks. After I finish my task on my browser, I would take a break offline rather than indulging into an endless stream of "You May Also Like". Actually, I would thank FF for not filling their homepage with these noises.
charcircuit•2h ago
Getting people to use Firefox less and take more breaks from it is not how you gain market share. You need to make it easy for people to find content they are interested in.
RandomBacon•6h ago
They should fix bugs.

Computer A:

Sometimes I cannot close tabs by clicking the X, or refresh/go-forward/go-back using the buttons next to the address bar.

Computer B:

Sometimes I get downloads that have "Unknown time left" (0 bytes/sec) when the X of X KB/MB is 100% and you can't remove it from the downloads dropdown.

I just discovered a new bug on Computer B, clicking the hamburger menu doesn't do anything.

Both are Ubuntu.

(I'm not a fan of the new menu in Firefox Beta for Android. I guess it looks nicer due to the greater whitespace, it just break muscle memory and has less options/selections.)

ImPostingOnHN•6h ago
Does computer B ever finish?

Do you see any disk i/o spikes when this is happening?

RandomBacon•5h ago
> Does computer B ever finish?

No, it stays there until I close the browser at which point I get the option to cancel the download or not to exit.

> disk i/o spikes

Unknown, I don't monitor that, and the bug doesn't happen all the time, not sure how to recreate it.

arp242•3h ago
At the end of the day, if you want to see these types of bugs fixed then by far the fastest way is to report them, which will probably mean you'll have to spend some time to track down what's causing that on your system. I have generally found reporting bugs to Firefox to be a reasonably positive experience.
TrueSlacker0•2h ago
I just made the switch to ubuntu as my main os from windows. Firefox on windows never seemed to have any problems. Now I keep getting the same problem as your computer a. It doesnt happen every time, and i havent figured out the pattern. But clicking the x to close a tab does nothing, middle clicking the tab still closes it. Any time this problem starts I also have issues using the mouse middle button to scroll (on all apps, not just ff) Very, very annoying. Since these issues seem linked it seems bigger than just ff.
shmerl•6h ago
What I want to see:

* Use Vulkan for rendering instead of OpenGL

* Drop dependency on GTK (it's a source of many problems) and just implement their own full fledged Wayland handling like Wine is doing.

* Back Servo again as the future engine.

GuB-42•4h ago
> Use Vulkan for rendering instead of OpenGL

How much of a difference does it make?

> just implement their own full fledged Wayland handling

As long as they still support X11... (I often do ssh -X ... firefox when I need to see a webpage from a remote machine)

> Back Servo again as the future engine

100% yes, if they still can that is

shmerl•3h ago
Vulkan is the modern option, the difference is not being stuck with legacy paths and using something that allows explicit sync.

Wayland is also the modern option, so I don't really worry about X11 use cases. For remote desktops, better to use something like FreeRDP anyway. X11 forwarding is much worse in every sense.

I think KDE are working on integrating FreeRDP server into Plasma for seamless usage.

Another thing to add for Firefox would be may be switching to Vulkan video from VAAPI (or at least having it as an option since ffmpeg already supports it) and using hardware acceleration for video encoding too, not just for video decoding.

wkat4242•3h ago
X11 can also do remote window forwarding, not just desktops which is super handy. Your windows appear in the remote computer with its own window manager just like you run them locally. One of the reasons I still use X.
shmerl•3h ago
For barebones window forwarding (no input) I use something like gpu-screen-recorder with SRT streaming output and play the result on the other end with mpv / ffplay.

Haven't looked into it, but FreeRDP might support specific window forwarding too rather than the whole desktop.

If you need something fancier there is Sunshine / Moonlight, but they still have an issue with not using Pipewire for window / screen capturing (and kmsgrab is not really the proper way to do it).

Anyway, X11 is a complete dead end in general so it's not really a viable option for anything serious.

GuB-42•2h ago
These look like kludges more than anything.

X11 may be a dead end but Wayland sucks as a replacement, so for now, I see no other option than supporting them both.

It may be technically possible to do the equivalent do X11 forwarding with Wayland, that is connecting to a server with a ssh terminal (no remote desktop, headless server), run a GUI app, and have it display its windows on my own desktop as if it was running locally. The problem is that Wayland is 17 years old and I still can't.

shmerl•2h ago
FreeRDP is pretty feature rich, so I wouldn't call it a kludge.

For any kind decent remote desktop access you need good performance, specifically low latency. X11 just isn't there.

Headless server is headless server - you can't have anything in such case there with X11 either. If you want to forward X11, you need X server, which means it's already not headless.

Instead of X server you can have any Wayland compositor (Wayland server) and whatever part that provides streaming (FreeRDP or what not).

So I don't see how X11 is any better - it's just worse due to having abysmal performance. X11 was never designed for real world remote desktop usage - it just happens to have network transparency. So it's X11 that's a kludge for such scenario if anything.

badc0ffee•1h ago
Look into NX. I used some kind of free NX package with Ubuntu about 10 years ago and it was about as fast as RDP.
shmerl•1h ago
Yeah, I've seen it in action (nomachine/nx) It's not bad. But problem is that it's not open source, so it's sort of DOA, unlike all the open options. They should have opened it from the start for it to be relevant.
heavyset_go•3h ago
> As long as they still support X11... (I often do ssh -X ... firefox when I need to see a webpage from a remote machine)

Look into xpra

yjftsjthsd-h•2h ago
> I often do ssh -X ... firefox when I need to see a webpage from a remote machine

Isn't https://github.com/neonkore/waypipe supposed to cover that?

aorth•1h ago
> Isn't https://github.com/neonkore/waypipe supposed to cover that?

The correct repository for Waypipe is https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mstoeckl/waypipe, but yes it does what you said and works well.

bigiain•5h ago
Sadly "I'd like Firefox to not be owned by an advertising/surveillance company" is unlikely to be considered in that forum (even if I were prepared to sign up to comment).

Everything else is minor details compared to that.

(Yes, this was posted using LibreWolf, but I often wonder if I can even trust that, having the vast majority of it's code written and managed by Mozilla.)

AlotOfReading•5h ago
This is the key differentiator Mozilla seems to deliberately avoid understanding. Chrome is a perfectly okay browser from almost every perspective: standards, functionality, performance, etc. What Chrome is not good at and can never be good at while it's owned by an advertising company is respecting user choice to disable advertising and choose privacy models that exclude the browser company.

Features and bugfixes are important, but they're table stakes for an everyday browser. They aren't enough to sell it.

vpShane•3h ago
> Chrome is a perfectly okay browser from almost every perspective

No, it isn't. They killed adblock, and have a business model of throttling other browsers to force people to Chrome (Youtube throttling) and doing digital fingerprinting with exclusive-only Chrome finger prints as seen here on HN the other day.

Firefox has anonym, where it sells your 'anonymous data'

https://lifehacker.com/tech/why-you-should-disable-firefox-p...

I just looked, go to Settings -> type advert and you'll see

Website Advertising Preferences Allow websites to perform privacy-preserving ad measurement This helps sites understand how their ads perform without collecting data about you. Learn more

It comes pre-checked for you.

I use Chromium for dev stuff, but now; there's no ublock origin.

AlotOfReading•3h ago
I tried to be clear about how Chrome is fine in most respects except for the incentives conflict, and you've simply pointed out symptoms stemming from that fundamental issue. Are we actually disagreeing or do you just dislike how I phrased it?
musicale•2h ago
You were very clear. PP seems to be in agreement with you in spite of objecting to the first line and ignoring the rest.
Snelius•3h ago
"ublock origin lite" works well
snvzz•2h ago
Not on Google's own websites such as Youtube.
PaulHoule•3h ago
Now that Google blocked uBlock origin, that's a good reason to keep using Firefox. It amazes me how much worse the web is on Chrome.
EbNar•6m ago
There are quite a few browser that don't ever need extensions to block ads. There's thus no reason for me to use Firefox (and I don't want to, until it's managed by Mozilla).
gonzobonzo•2h ago
> Features and bugfixes are important, but they're table stakes for an everyday browser. They aren't enough to sell it.

One of the reasons I've moved to Chrome is because of the memory problems with Mozilla that I've been experiencing for years. Every so often I look up other people who've been having the same issues. They seem to have been reported for years, but there's often a surprising amount of hostility from Firefox fans whenever they get mentioned.

As an aside, both Firefox and Chrome made their browsers significantly worse when they changed the order of windows in the windows menu from chronological to alphabetical.

f-ffox•3h ago
I’d also ask them how they plan to build a time machine to undo selling their users’ data when they said they wouldn’t.

Also- what kind of animal are you?!

eth0up•5h ago
I use FF as a primary browser on Desktop and Nightly in Android. There's much I could say about FF, but I think it would be futile.

In Debian, I'd use FF-LTS and regular FF. Since moving to Void, xbps allows only one version, so I use FF and Vivaldi.

I'd appreciate any opinions on Vivaldi. It's the only functional alternative browser I've found in the repos. But I have to start it with:

    LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE=1
Which sucks, and applies to OpenShot and a lot of other software that gets fussy with intel chips in some versions of Linux. Chromium I prefer to avoid, and it wants a password to initiate, which I understand but refuse to comply with. But that's all aside the point. Opinions, please...
yjftsjthsd-h•1h ago
Can you run a different Firefox via flatpak? (Or x11docker or plain docker, or nix, or I guess Snap)
dbg31415•5h ago
Firefox should ship with a local AI agent that can browse, summarize, and act on the web — entirely on-device.

I don’t want to send my searches through Google or OpenAI just to get basic tasks done. Give me a sandboxed local model that can:

* Read pages and data that’s loaded through it

* Summarize content

* Act on rule-based prompts I define (e.g. auto-reply in Slack, triage emails, autofill forms, upvote followed author’s posts…)

Let me load a Slack tab and have the AI draft replies for me. Same for Gmail. Basically, let Firefox interact with the web on my behalf and train the AI to be my assistant.

Beyond that, extensions already do most of what I need — but a built-in, private AI agent would actually move the needle.

bigstrat2003•1h ago
I very much do not want AI slop added to the browser. That would be such a negative feature.
scubadude•5h ago
Straight to under 0.5% usage no doubt. Making a mockery of all the unpaid people who have committed code over the years. The Mozilla foundation have shirked their responsibility as a bastion against commercial interests.
kevin_thibedeau•5h ago
Their job was to rake in millions while keeping the benefactor happy with no real competition. Mission accomplished.
dralley•34m ago
The kneejerk Mozilla hate on HN gets so fucking tedious.

Google's marketing budget for Chrome is greater than Mozilla's entire budget. They sponsor an F1 team FFS. They spent a decade paying off Adobe, Java, AVG, Avast and all the other shitty free AV softwares to auto-install Chrome. They targeted Firefox users with Chrome ads on the homepages of Google and YouTube. That's literally billions of dollars worth of marketing alone that they don't even have to pay for.

Mozilla's competitors (Google, Microsoft, Apple) are collectively worth the GDP of three entire continents combined (Africa, South America, Australia) with a couple trillion USD to spare. Each controls an operating system (or two) with more than a billion users each on which their browsers are pre-installed.

No shit they struggle to compete on brand and marketshare. They're basically forced by the economics of the market to do search deals with Google, and whenever they try to develop independent sources of revenue people shit on them for that too. People shit on them for making deals with Google and make insinuations about them being "controlled opposition" because of that dependency, but also shit on them for pursuing any other independent sources of revenue, like the branded VPN service or the innocuous cross-promotion of that Disney movie with the Red Panda.

People shat on them for trying to compete with Android via FirefoxOS because the bet didn't work out, even though it was probably the only way they could have avoided this outcome and gained real independence, had it worked out.

"Just focus on Firefox", they say - unless that means laying off people that work on Rust, or AV1, or Opus, or WebAssembly, or Let's Encrypt, or experimental browser engines that wouldn't have been production-ready for a decade. According to HN, Mozilla should focus but also keep churning out and spinning off research projects, but only successful research projects, not ones that fail. Anything Mozilla does that isn't Firefox is bad if it fails but if it works out they never get credit anyway.

leidenfrost•16m ago
The idea behind the parent comment is not that they can't compete, but they are specifically made not to.

Sort of a puppet browser made only for proving the court that the giants are not technically a monopoly, while ranking a bare minimum number of users for them to count.

While that's not entirely unreasonable, I don't think that's the doom of Mozilla. Puppet or not, their tangled codebase makes it a pita to contribute anything if you're not being paid a salary for it.

Despite having a high expectation for the "free browser", deep down we know that it's the same "Free in theory" software, not unlike Java or Vscode. Software that's made by a company and once they stop pouring money on corporate development and support the project will become a zombie in no time.

nixpulvis•5h ago
idk, get more people to use it? Release a standalone password manager that integrates nicely? Buy some ads on instagram or something?
ivanjermakov•4h ago
How you would benefit from FF having more users?
nixpulvis•4h ago
More developers would test for Firefox again.
werdnapk•3h ago
I do all my dev in Firefox and rarely test in Chrome. I've been made aware of maybe a handful of issues over many many years doing it this way. If it works in Firefox, 99.9% of the time, it's also working in Chrome.
wkat4242•3h ago
Sites would not mark my session as suspicious so much which causes me so many evil captchas
wvenable•3h ago
Lockwise? They killed it.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/end-of-support-firefox-...

xeonmc•3h ago
If I get a nickel every time an advertising company in possession of a mainstream web browser gains a reputation for an accumulated history of product graveyards, I’d have two nickels, which isn’t a lot but it’s weird that it happened twice.
floundy•1h ago
We might be able to get you up to a whole dollar, just listing off the various chat/messaging apps Google has killed off over the years. I take it as an opportunity to move to FOSS/self-hosted substitutes when that happens.
JumpCrisscross•4h ago
Are Mozilla’s donations still roughly equal to their CEO’s compensation [1][2]?

[1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2024/a... ”$7.8M in donations from the public, grants from foundations, and government funding” in 2023

[2] https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2022/mozilla-fdn-990... $6.9mm in 2022, page 7

saurik•3h ago
That's insane :/. But, maybe, "on the bright side", The Mozilla Foundation is unrelated in some sense to Firefox? AFAIK, they don't spend any of their money on it anyway.

The whole Mozilla situation is even more of a scam than how the Wikimedia Foundation uses sob stories about paying for Wikipedia to get people to donate money to an entity which spends almost no money on Wikipedia... but, at least it does run Wikipedia! lol :/.

There is another interesting detail from your reference that makes it seem even worse to me: it says the CEO's salary is "paid only by a related for-profit"; at first, I was thinking "ok, at least the Foundation in fact is spending the money it is being donated (though, not on Firefox)"... but then I realized that means the Corporation is, in fact, spending $7m that it could have spent on Firefox.

anonymousab•2h ago
> AFAIK, they don't spend any of their money on it anyway

The glass-half-full take I heard a while back was: at least every dollar they take from the foundation donations for these causes is a dollar that they could have found a way to take from Firefox development instead.

KPGv2•31m ago
> The whole Mozilla situation is even more of a scam than how the Wikimedia Foundation uses sob stories about paying for Wikipedia to get people to donate money to an entity which spends almost no money on Wikipedia... but, at least it does run Wikipedia! lol :/.

I don't think these are comparable at all or how it's a scam. The CEO of the entire wikimedia foundation makes half a million a year. The foundation is considered a GREAT charity to donate to by Charity Navigator. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/200049703

knome•23m ago
wikipedia still being around after all this time and still maintaining links to just download the entire thing and having no ads makes whatever they're doing good to me, ha.
twelvechairs•12m ago
Wikimedia is run transparently which is great but I dont really believe they need the money when you see their financial statement (link below) and think about what they need to run. Plenty of really deserving charities running on the sniff of an oily rag not paying 100m in salaries plus travel, conferences etc.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/f/f6/Wikim...

BeetleB•5m ago
I don't really understand the angst against the Wikimedia Foundation.

They are transparent. No one's being conned into donating. As long as Wikipedia is running fine, and is not degrading, and they're not actively harming it, I don't care. People routinely spend money on much worse things. Is donating $3 to Wikimedia once a year really worse than giving 50-100x more to Starbucks?

nick0garvey•3h ago
It says "PAID ONLY BY A RELATED FOR-PROFIT", which looks to be the Mozilla Corporation. Donations are not directly paying the CEO, although I agree more of the profits from the Corporation could flow into the non-profit.
BolexNOLA•3h ago
I mean if you reduce something enough you can say “x pays for y” in almost any case for anything since it’s all technically one big pot for one group. Even earmarked money.

If I give you $500 to help pay for your medical bills and a few months later (bills have been paid by then) I see you bought a PS5, can I say, “not cool you used my money to buy a PS5”?

Don’t get me wrong I think Mozilla/FF has been very poorly managed. But I have just never liked these kinds of “transitive property” arguments or whatever we want to call it. Unless they’re straight up funneling donations into the CEO’s bank account I just don’t see it that way.

ozgrakkurt•2h ago
You could say “you bought a ps5 with my money” though.

If that person had the money, they should have spent on medical bills. If they got it after, they should have paid you back before buying a ps5 maybe.

Or if you just gave them the money and don’t expect any accountability, it is ok.

sothatsit•2h ago
But that's the whole point: they did pay their medical bills. It's not like they didn't pay their medical bills and instead bought a ps5. They did both.

Mozilla develops Firefox, and they also pay their CEO a lot. Their CEO may be overpaid, the company may be mismanaged, but at least they are still upholding their commitment to maintaining Firefox. Picking out one expense that you don't like and saying "all the donations go to this, see!" is just disingenuous.

Whether donating is worthwhile is another question, and it seems like the answer would be no. But it is a very different thing to say "All the donations just go to the CEO" instead of "I think the CEO is paid too much".

We could also cherry-pick in the other direction and say the CEO is negotiating deals to bring in the 90% of non-donation revenue of Mozilla, in which case you could easily say that his pay is a result of that revenue creation.

rishav_sharan•1h ago
I think the key here is that they didn't have money to do both.

If they had money enough for medicine, then why beg for donation?

BolexNOLA•1h ago
You gift me $100 on Venmo or cashapp or whatever to go dinner with my partner. I transfer it to my bank. It’s in the same bank account as all my other liquid cash. How can either of us ever say whether or not I spent that specific $100 on dinner?

Mozilla/FF has a pot of money that donations go in to, which is the same pot they use to operate as well as pay people, which includes their CEO.

sothatsit•1h ago
I'm not trying to defend Mozilla begging for donations when they really don't need them. My point is that cherry-picking one expense that you don't like, and then saying all the donations go to that, is cherry-picking the financials, and is misleading.
JumpCrisscross•2h ago
> whatever we want to call it

Fungibility [1].

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility

BolexNOLA•1h ago
Thanks that’s the word I was fishing for
c0nducktr•2h ago
Wow, I could run a brand into the ground for far less than $6.9mm.
MathMonkeyMan•1h ago
But could you do it while convincing yourself and everyone you're beholden to that you're not?
theteapot•47m ago
Isn't that most software devs?
ramsj•34m ago
Meredith Whittaker at Signal made < $800K [1]. I can't fathom how $6.9M is even remotely acceptable.

[1] https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824...

deepspace•3h ago
I interact with physical devices frequently. Mozilla's adamant refusal to implement WebSerial and WebUsb in Firefox forces me to install Chrome on every platform i use. That is just an asinine hill to die on.
Neywiny•3h ago
At least edge supports it so I have something users can use without needing to install even chrome. So disappointing Firefox is too high and mighty
accelbred•3h ago
If firefox implemented WebSerial and WebUsb, I'd lose a lot of trust in it. I say this as an embedded developer.
deepspace•2h ago
Care to elaborate?
ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7•2h ago
Plenty of takes on this

https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#webusb

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34564119

https://nullrequest.com/posts/thecaseagainstwebusb

and on and on...

xxpor•1h ago
What arrogance. Why it is their job to gatekeep this?
ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7•58m ago
Well, the reason is in the links I provided, and the reasoning doesn't scream arrogance to me.

Personally, I think choice is great. Why be upset when you can download chromium (it is supported by pretty much any platform FF is) and use it to do all sorts of stuff with WebUSB, if you are into that?

Still, I would like to see FF disable these features by default and allow opt-in. I don't see a great reason to avoid implementing them behind some "wall" (other than to avoid an increase in a concealed attack surface).

Spivak•5m ago
It literally is their job. One of Mozilla's roles is to give their opinion on proposed web standards. It's one of the factors that determines what actually becomes a standard. WebUSB is Chrome (and derivatives) only at the moment. You can not like where they landed, perfectly valid, but they were asked.
robswc•3h ago
Mozilla is the problem, not FireFox.

I just don't really feel like using FireFox while Mozilla has a hand in it.

blibble•3h ago
straight into the history books unless they drop the AI, ads and telemetry

mozilla are now an advertising company, so other than ublock origin there's no reason to use it over chrome

and I'm pretty certain they'll get rid of manifest v2 soon too

pipeline_peak•1h ago
Genuinely curious, what history book would talk about a browser with 10 years of commercial success?

I’d say it made some mark on FOSS, but in any book not dedicated to that it’s nothing more than a footnote.

radley•3h ago
It would be great if they figured out that about:config and command-line to do anything is not actually good UX for most humans.
musicale•2h ago
How else would they hide the useful settings that they don't want you to mess with because you might change the bad default behavior?
msgodel•2h ago
It really seems to me like they've been intentionally adding friction to the configuration.
krackers•1h ago
inb4 "We've simplified and streamlined the firefox experience by removing confusing control knobs and options."
musicale•2h ago
TL;DR: nowhere good.
promiseofbeans•2h ago
Keeping up with web standards, and dropping the advertising rubbish that's making them somehow atrophy users faster than they were before.

Otherwise, they'll be gone. Thunderbird has proven people are willing to donate millions if they know their money will go directly to the software. In 2022, Thunderbird collected ~6 million in donations (~20 million users) compared to Mozilla's ~9 million (from >200 million users)

kennywinker•2h ago
Mozilla made $826.6M in 2024. If they got thunderbird levels of support $6/20 firefox would bring in $60 million. Aka 7% of current revenue. Idk all their revenue sources so idk what the overall picture would be, but my gut says $60mil wouldn’t cut it and firefox will never get the support thunderbird gets because of different user bases.
chrishare•2h ago
Most would be search engine agreements I presume, which is still proportional to the user counts.
ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7•2h ago
Firefox should focus on privacy, keeping extensions viable, and implementing standards, so they don't get swamped by competition.

No one really cares about a majority of the UX sugar, IMO.

I personally find the LLM context menu useful and reading mode awesome, but these are not features that by themselves would drive me to use the browser.

aorth•1h ago
Reading mode is awesome! Especially on mobile. Yes to everything else you said too.
aetherspawn•2h ago
Uh yeah, rip nearly every feature out of Firefox and move it to “official extensions” that you can install optionally.

Go on a hardcore crusade on performance and battery life. Safari currently uses half the amount of energy compared to Firefox (according to macOS measurements), so I switched from Firefox to Safari and noticed hours of difference in battery life when I’m out and about.

lxgr•2h ago
I don't think Firefox uses meaningfully more energy due to "optional features", but rather due to simply not optimizing for battery efficiency at the same level that Apple does for Safari.

That type of optimization requires tons of profiling and is less glamorous than implementing new features, so I could see how it's hard to prioritize for Mozilla, especially if optimizations might look very different across OSes.

yjftsjthsd-h•2h ago
> rip nearly every feature out of Firefox and move it to “official extensions” that you can install optionally.

Only if they properly maintain those APIs. I'm still salty that they had tab groups, then broke that feature out to an extension, then killed the extension. (Then, much later, recreated the feature over again)

But yes, if done well modularity is probably good from a development perspective too.

dec0dedab0de•2h ago
I was wrong, Brendan Eich would have been better.
ripped_britches•2h ago
Change your name to Rust Foundation and give up on browser market
nektro•1h ago
i like where firefox is going but stop paying the executives so much, get leaner
Spivak•15m ago
Mozilla brings in a lot of money and they're sitting on a pile of cash. There's nothing even remotely close to pressure to become lean. They could double the CEO compensation and it wouldn't even be noticed. They have the opposite problem, a lot of money but not enough worthwhile ventures to invest it in.
pipeline_peak•1h ago
/dev/null
rappatic•1h ago
When are we getting Mac biometric support for extensions? I want to be able to use my Touch ID with my password manager on my Mac! Do any HNers have solutions for this (Dashlane)?
Reason077•1h ago
What I’d like to see is a setting that prevents websites from opening links in new tabs. eBay and AliExpress, specifically, but I’m sure others do it too.

I haven’t found a way to block this very annoying behaviour in any browser, short of installing “new tab blocker” browser extensions, but they are unreliable.

tsoukase•1h ago
I am pretty sure Google donates a great share of Mozilla's revenue but demands the following with this money:

- Firefox is alive, so that they are a theoretical competitor to avoid anti-trust measures

- Firefox has the lowest market share that remains that said competitor without distracting many users from G engagement

- Firefox emains of few steps behind in features and perforfance so that it remains in this pesky market share

- of course Firefox keeps Google search the default

- may be other under the table agreements? (Request for comments)

I cannot foresay what will happen next with the state of MV3.

mparramon•52m ago
I've yet to have one single problem after running Firefox as my main driver for ~3 months. Only 2 webpages have made me quickly open Chrome instead to check them out, and the content wasn't worth engaging for long.

It puzzles me how more programmers don't switch to a real open source browser not controlled by an advertising giant which will use their overwhelming monopolistic force to steer the way browsers work so that it benefits its bottom line.

Vote with your feet, use Firefox.

t1234s•1h ago
The only feature a browser needs is speed. Anything else should be an extension.
captainepoch•8m ago
So... Here's an idea: stop wasting time and money on things like that, listen to the community, hire engineers, and make a browser that can be at the same level as Chrome. We already told you what we want and need, no need to keep asking.

Mozilla and the story on "How to waste money and resources" is getting tiresome at this point.