does doing so mean you can bypass the microsoft account bs?

you make excellent points, but not sure i can agree with your conclusion

if we had full source a variety of automated analysis and hardening tooling could be applied which is much much more efficient compared to parsing the arch docs.

seems roughly accurate.

but probably would add

the mayor is a good person, and genuinely appears to want to see the best in people. but most of the reported incidents involve thugs with overt connections to an organised crime syndicate which is currently so powerful they mostly don’t have to answer to anyone.

the same crime syndicate has been granted the contract to light the field, cut the grass and keep everyone safe.

the mayor has a fairly good record of delivering on good community projects. so on the one hand mayor has a good rep, on the other…it’s an organised crime syndicate who is literally one of the worst offenders when it comes to making the field unsafe in the first place.

That’s wrong. The creation of PPA isn’t about getting paid

ok that’s fair, thanks for the useful info i didn’t know that. until money or other resources change hands i’m happy to withdraw the view that while firefox is underfunded by the community, it may not have resulted in these kinds of collaborations.

what i’m not understanding is how average non-adblock running users will be better off?

i appreciate you’ve stated how the sole purpose of this collaboration is intended by mozilla.

yet unlike the current implementation which appears to be opt-out, afaict meta’s particpation here is entirely opt-in, isn’t it? if meta etc decide on a whim they want to have their cake and eat it too, what is stopping them?

imo we’re all lacking innocence, regardless of using adblockers or not. we all, myself included, haven’t funded mozilla fairly for FF.

even if viewing ads for a website was an ethically sound exchange (in principle? probably achievable; in modern implementations? highly debatable),

regardless, that revenue is naturally for the sites not for the browser. maintaining a modern browser requires non-trivial resources, alot of us get hours/day from our browsers, advertisers are getting paid, and meanwhile ff has been missing out.

i could be wrong, but my gut feeling is mozilla is (mostly) a legit organisation with genuine good interests at heart. and if we’d all donated even a fraction of what its genuinely worth, they probably wouldn’t have to make these kinds of faustian deals.

giving advertisers enough to leave innocent people alone

I think this is very optimistic, the ad industry has virtually zero incentive to play fairly here. afaict they’ve currently got it far too good to have any genuine motivation to make concessions?

if i had to guess, one of the biggest actual threats on their horizon is somehow maintaining s̶u̶f̶f̶i̶c̶i̶e̶n̶t̶ infinite growth, which is further reason for them to NOT be satisfied with an equivalent or lesser scope than they already have right now.

imo its not a matter if but when it will be discovered meta’s behaved in bad faith here. i could be wrong, and hopefully i am because it would ofc philosophically be a step in the right direction.

To suggest that Mozilla PPA has no benefit to the average user is disingenuous at best or outright malicious malpractice with the intent of defamation

Thanks. Could you give some examples how the average user benefits from this collaboration between mozilla and meta, as implemented or due for implementation in firefox?

Dunning-Kruger effect

could you please explain further what you mean and what you’re referring to?

noscript is like a screwdriver. umatrix is the whole toolbox.

both have their place

not sure if you’re being sarcastic, but if anything this news paints linux deployment in an even better light.

Going cashless is a bad idea. But not because of this.

It’s pretty clear this incident has highlighted a myriad of very important issues.

It’s likely more productive to discuss the other issues in their own threads - this thread is clearly focused on the cashless problem.

not if they’re only covering the cost of parts

and probably have some of the most depraved porn habits imaginable

cos nothing proves “microsoft <3 opensource” like releasing a project over ⅓ of a century old

great news, openai keeps getting more open by the minute

/s

they’re just projecting their own tactics on you.

they’re the one moving the goalposts with that laughable brad pitt bs.

the mental gymnastics you go through to parrot corporate propaganda is honestly just astonishing

its not the actual money laundering they object to.

it’s that they didn’t get a cut.

deleted by creator

this is the (un)fortunate reality.

unfortunate in that keeping a modern browser up to date is a serious task when you need to compete with the agenda and scale of google etc

fortunate in that its a relatively simple solution, the community needs to fund the software.

its tough though as i can imagine if they pulled the kind of popup shit wikipedia does, it will just drive people away. what people don’t realise ofc is that with chrome you are paying for it (with your data), but for some reason they’re not viewed in the equivalent light.

Thanks, do you know if/where we can download the full phind source including the full models, training data etc? To run 100% offline?

edit: for anyone reading this thread, YOU CAN’T. it’s not currently opensource. and afaik there is no concrete timeline for it to be opened, other than sometime “down the road”.

to be clear, i definitely agree we have the creative nerd factor the corporations lack, but unfortunately there’s been a bit of trading on ‘open’ while still being very closed in the “AI” world, really hope this doesn’t turn out to be another example of that.