Connect with Lunduke and other members of Lunduke community
    • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      422·
      10 months ago

      I’m so out of the loop here. Never heard of him before. A quick web search yielded little. But his seemingly-abandoned Twitter profile is…something. https://nitter.net/bryanlunduke

      I used to say controversial things that I don’t really believe to try and get attention. Now I’ve changed. Black Lives Matter. He / Him

      🤷

      What’s his deal?

      • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        492·
        10 months ago

        Oh he’s very active: conservativenerds.locals.com

        He was one of the founding members of Jupiter Broadcasting. Was heavily involved in openSUSE for a long time (maybe even on the board?) and did a lot of Linux journalism. If you’ve ever seen the annual tongue in cheek “Linux sucks” video, that is him.

        It’s a huge shame. He’s very charismatic and likeable otherwise, I just wish he also wasn’t carrying around awful opinions about so many other people.

    • Hal-5700X@lemmy.world
      614·
      10 months ago

      noted racist

      How is he a racist? If he’s a noted racist. That must mean there’s a ton of proof you can link to, right.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        123·
        10 months ago

        He announced to be against BLM. He claimed that protesting police brutality against black people equates to racism against whites. There’s tons of that on the internet, you can google for it yourself. Your lack of basic web search skills is not my problem.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          21·
          10 months ago

          I’m also against BLM, but I agree with BLM that policing needs a lot of reforms. My solutions are just really different from what they propose, such as:

          • end qualified immunity - cops that commit crimes should be treated like any other criminal
          • increase funding for police - the current pay structure and expectations attract power-hungry people, we should adjust both
          • end civil asset forfeiture
          • legalize marijuana and decriminalize victimless crimes like drug possession - if there’s no victim, there’s no crime (and you can’t victimize yourself)
          • split police into armed and unarmed groups - armed police should not be on the regular police beat, only as backup

          And so on.

          BLM wants to strip the police of their teeth, I want to put a leash on the police and remove the feral officers.

          Maybe that’s different from what Lunduke means, IDK, I don’t follow the guy. But just saying “doesn’t support BLM” is not the same as “is racist.” Some of my best friends are POC (including my wife), so it’s entirely possible to want what’s best for them while disagreeing with BLM.

  • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
    544·
    10 months ago

    What an shitty article. It is looking on the revenue, ceo income and market share of only 2 years and trys to make a point.

    • angrymouse@lemmy.worldEnglish
      393·
      10 months ago

      It’s this fucking lunduke again, he is a right-wing that tries to call Mozilla for whatever reason from time to time.

    • Proteish@awful.systemsCatalà
      16·
      10 months ago

      Lunduke is such a contrarian. He cannot help himself from trying to argue that he understands better than common opinion, whether or not his position makes sense.

      This is the man who disabled HTTPS on his site because he felt that the fact certificates can expire and domains can change hands made it not secure enough… and that using plain HTTP was somehow a more pragmatic security approach.

    • 0xtero@beehaw.org
      6·
      10 months ago

      I think I recognize the name from distant past, but not up to date. He’s problematic?

      • chaogomu@kbin.social
        132·
        10 months ago

        Seems to be a Qanon guy. Or he was for a time. I’ve not paid attention to him in years.

        He also always came off as a grifter in search of a con, so the Qanon shit might have been part of that, but who can ever tell with those people.

          • chaogomu@kbin.social
            91·
            10 months ago

            You should also take the post with a grain of salt, In addition to his shitty politics, Lunduke doesn’t have the best reputation for truthfulness in his tech reporting.

            He’s fudged numbers before, and often makes clickbait titles that just are not supported by his blog posts or videos.

            The shitty politics were not the only reason I started ignoring his dumb ass.

            • 0xtero@beehaw.org
              2·
              10 months ago

              Yeah, noted.
              I did go and read the report myself. The blog combines lot of stuff and makes its own narrative, but it’s not wildly inaccurate as far as I can see and I can’t say it changed my overall level of disappointment.

              The strategy letters from the Chair and the President are full of AI mumbo-jumbo and they’ve expanded the board from six to ten people, taking on four new members who are supposed to be able to guide them towards this new, fantastic AI-filled future. Quite large percentage of the board is now meant to be there for “building better future with AI”.

              Their income is still largely (81%) tied to one customer and the rest are scraps from VPN and Pocket subscriptions. Basically the whole corp sits well and truly in Google’s pocket.

              The Foundation President gets $300k year, the Corp CEO gets $600k year, but somehow also qualified for $6.3M bonus totaling $6.9M. That’s a nice raise from $5.4M last year. Sure, the CEO compensation packages are globally totally fucked up and I guess it’s easy to point to “competitive roles elsewhere” and motivate the need for year on year extra millions, but they have been firing people due to shrinking revenues, so not sure what her performance bonuses are tied to.

              As to them abandoning Firefox. That’s perhaps a claim taken too far. Gotta do some creative between the lines reading. They say they’re building this fantastic, bright AI future on the base of their core products (so Firefox and Thunderbird). I think they’ll stick around and I think it makes sense for Google to keep it going in some marginal market-share capacity order to avoid anti-trust watchdogs.

  • atro_city@fedia.io
    3712·
    10 months ago

    We, the community, really need to make a separate browser project. It’s clear that Mozilla doesn’t care about competing with chrome/chromium. They just want to be in the market to get that sweet google money so that google can’t be sued for being a monopoly by funding a “competitor”.

  • neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    274·
    10 months ago

    What methods are being used to measure browser market share? Are those methods inclusive of Firefox users utilizing privacy-forward tools and ad blockers? If not, then Firefox market share may not necessarily be dwindling.

    Then again, if Mozilla’s revenue stream is aligned with the world of advertising, Firefox users who strive to make themselves invisible to advertisers are being written-off outright by Mozilla. The population of browser market share is only counting those who advertisers can influence - nobody else matters.

  • 0xtero@beehaw.org
    171·
    10 months ago

    Well this is, shall we say, not surprising, but nevertheless disappointing.

    • AlteredStateBlob@kbin.social
      1·
      10 months ago

      Do note that is not for the foundation which runs and develops Firefox, but for the company. Still shit, but separate from the browser.

      • 0xtero@beehaw.org
        2·
        10 months ago

        Yeah, well it’s the corp that pays that CEO bonus salary, not the foundation.

  • Icalasari@kbin.social
    151·
    10 months ago

    Dammit, and Firefox is the only browser not jumping on the embedding drm bandwagon…

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, that’s been the case for like 10 years now.

      The focus should be on securing independent funding. This means paid services or increased independent donations. Some ideas:

      • Mozilla VPN - essentially a wrapper over Mullvad, but the landing page doesn’t give a good reason to choose it over Mullvad (e.g. container tabs); choosing a server per site should be front and center
      • email - I know they tried at some point, but they really should integrate with something like ProtonMail (e.g. FF-specific TLD with service through ProtonMail)
      • password manager - they have their own solution, but it’s FF-only; perhaps have a cobranded Bitwarden that integrates with other Mozilla products cleanly
      • ad blocker - Mozilla should work with major websites to drop ads and let the user choose between privacy-respecting ads (served by Mozilla based on local browsing history) or anonymous payment (Mozilla would host something like GNU Taler, which you’d load through a method of your choosing)

      The last I think could be truly disruptive.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
        2·
        10 months ago

        Honestly Mozilla could be a hugely profitable company. There is clearly a market for privacy and freedom tech.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          1·
          10 months ago

          Yup, and they have both a for profit and nonprofit part of the org, so it’s totally doable. They just need competent leadership who legitimately care about being independent of search money.

  • reddig33@lemmy.world
    536·
    10 months ago

    Isn’t Firefox that browser that insists on rolling their own UI instead of using native controls on each platform?