SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Firefox 89: Can this redesign stem browser's decline?:
Mozilla has released Firefox 89, proclaiming it a "fresh new Firefox," though it comes amid a relentless decline in market share.
Firefox matters more than most web browsers, because it uses its own browser engine, called Quantum, and its own JavaScript engine, called SpiderMonkey. By contrast, most other browsers, including Chrome and Chromium, Edge, Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi use the Google-sponsored Blink engine, while Apple's Safari uses WebKit (from which Blink was forked). The existence of multiple independent implementations is important for web standards, helping to prevent a single vendor from pushing through changes without consensus, and ensuring that the standards are coherent.
A glance at a statistics site like W3Counter is telling. In April 2008, Microsoft enjoyed a 63 per cent market share with Internet Explorer, and with Firefox performing strongly behind it at 29.3 per cent. By April 2010, IE was down to 48.6 per cent, Firefox up to 32.7 per cent, and Google's newer Chrome was starting to make an impact, at 8.3 per cent.
In April 2012, the three were almost on a par, though Chrome (26.8 per cent) had overtaken Firefox (25 per cent). Today, Chrome is at 65.3 per cent, Safari second at 16.7 per cent, IE and Edge has 5.7 per cent, and Firefox has just 4.1 per cent share. Despite numerous updates, Mozilla's browser has declined from 6.1 per cent share a year ago. Statcounter tells a similar story, reporting a 3.59 per cent share for Firefox, down from 4.21 per cent a year ago.
(Score: 5, Informative) by EEMac on Sunday June 06 2021, @01:20PM (4 children)
The LGBTQUX thing doesn't bother me. But the level of content is worrying.
Mozilla Developer Network [youtube.com]:
* Where do browser styles come from?
* What does "revert" CSS do?
* Why is CSS so weird?
* Inspecting the CSS cascade
* Did you know you can screenshot web pages?
* We just updated underline styling together
Google Chrome Developers [youtube.com]:
* The Web Audio API
* Building a web application with Angular and Firebase
* Building user-adaptive interfaces
* How to monetize your progressive web application
* Structured data for developers
* Connecting hardware devices to the web
* WebAssembly threads
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 06 2021, @06:13PM
You're both saying the same thing, indirectly.
Almost nobody has a problem with companies hiring or working with folks that go against the stereotypes for a given role. The problem is that when that hiring starts to become a defining position of a company, they're left disproportionately (if not *only* as optics would suggest of the Mozilla Developer Network) hiring people that fall outside the stereotype of a role. The natural consequence of this is that you end up picking from a much smaller population.
That already poses a major problem, and then pair it with the fact that the distribution of the subpopulation may itself already be worse than the stereotyped population. The negative bias is not because of their identity, but because what it's in lieu of. Somebody who goes to great efforts expressing and demonstrating their sexuality, "queerness", or whatever else is, on average, going to have a different set of skills and abilities than somebody who considers a great weekend to be 2 boxes of pizza and 40 hours of code, and they look like it.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 06 2021, @06:30PM (2 children)
It should, irrespective of whatever your views on it are.
It has become the yranac, the more you see a project/organisation making an issue of it , the more toxic that project/organisation has become. As manglement think the need to be seen to pander to the current fetish of (insert this week's alphabet string here) ideology has become a greater organisational concern than the need to hire people cabable of productively filling positions within their organisation, you eventually end up with an increasingly useless organisation top heavy with mediocre (but alphabetically correct ) personnel.
Which is why you end up thinking
When you look at their output.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday June 07 2021, @06:57AM (1 child)
The what? Is this really an obscure Star Trek TNG reference you expect anyone to get, or something else?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07 2021, @02:06PM
Reverse canary,
The yranac is a bird which thrives in increasingly toxic atmospheres, the more toxic the atmosphere, the happier and quieter they become, as opposed to your traditional canary, which screams blue murder with the increasing toxicity.
I'd been using it that sense for years, decades actually, got it from an ex-army colleague down in London who basically initially described it to me as 'it's that usually awkward bastard you keep an eye on, and if they suddenly go all quiet and start looking smug, then it's a sign that shit is about to happen..and happen to everyone but him'.
As far as organisations are concerned, it's when they say or do something obviously idiotic/irrational to everyone outside the organisation, yet there's no apparent internal voice of dissent from people who should know better..a sure sign that something's wrong somewhere internally within that organisation.
I couldn't figure out the ST:TNG reference, didn't watch it, so googled it...I can see your confusion.
Weird, it must have been a very specific army unit slang term, then again, the guy I got it from had a rather interesting 'post' military career, e.g. how many people do you come across in life who, as a 'civilian', had a document which authorised him to have the full co-operation of the police and military of a dictatorship in any matter he cared? (then you find out that a very well-known rock guitarist is his cousin's son in the course of a conversation about a curious contract he was once offered in closing acts of the Vietnam war)