Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Foundation Meets The GNOME Foundation
An anonymous reader writes "The board of directors of the GNOME foundation recently met with a few representatives of the Mozilla foundation - discussing how they could collaborate a little closer in future. A number of interesting things were discussed, including XAML/Avalon and the future of Firefox in GNOME/Linux. Check out the minutes of the meeting on the Gnome mailing list."
I've used Firefox before and think its a great browser, but I have a number of worries about it. I mentioned a few of them before. I've looked into it a bit more now, and the more I discovered the more worried I've become. Basically Firefox has the capacity to give very bad press to many more Open Source products, to tar them with it's dirty brush, should certain features of the browser be publicised widely.
That's a contentious point, so before you moderate me as flamebait please give me an opportunity to explain. My previous post on this subject resulted me in getting terrible karma because people unfairly called me a troll. If it is trolling to point out potential problems that we should all be wary of then, yes, I am a troll.
A brief summary of my previous post would be to say that certain features of Firefox make it too easy to misuse the web browser to surf for pornography. It was rightly pointed out at that time by respondants that the power to misuse came from the individual, not the computer program. But I've since discovered that actual Mozilla supported extensions such as this one, "Magpie" or this one "Prev/Next image", which are actually given web space and bookmarked by default by the Mozilla developers themselves can only be useful in the context of searching for and downloading hardcore or violent pornography . For the Mozilla developers to support these two extensions is similar to them offering a "Porno" button theme. If they would not support a sexually explicit theme on their homepage, why are they giving space to extensions which allow you to easily fetch pornographic pictures? Let me reiterate: these extensions are only useful in that context. What is the difference? Does this not give indirect approval of these activities? I think it does.
Pornography is destroying the Internet and the moral health of this nation. By offering openly these functionalities, by publicising and supporting them as mainstream, the Mozilla Developers are commiting a grave moral error. How long is it until some paid Microsoft shill notices them and publicly calls Firefox "the browser of the perverted"? That would be an entirely supportable conclusion. And it would reflect badly not only on Mozilla, but other Open Source projects too.
Check out the extensions for yourself and try to justify them as anything other than porn gatherers. Then join me in mailing the Firefox team, to help them back on the right path (No reply as of 04/24, and it has been about a month). Having a major open source project associate itself publicly with perversion and pornography, with the exploitation and degradation of women, is no way to gain respect.
Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
KDE in all this?
and sweaty man love ensues.
Ohhhhh nooooo, they say it's bloated and slow... GNOMEZILLA!!!! /BOC
I hope not, QT sucks ass.