@lecroix74 What the hell is the relationship between what they did and taking money from neonazi supporters? What are you even talking about with this?

I also think you misunderstand: I don’t have to prove solutions. My ability to criticize doesn’t require me to have solutions either.

As per walking it back,’it doesn’t make things ok. What wait a week to say which law causes this? Why lot start with that? Why not consult the community? Same mistakes, for the past 10 years…

@prlzx@hostux.social Of course a browser needs the data to build the DOM. They don’t need user data though, they don’t need to grant Mozilla a license to use that data. They also don’t need to remove all mentions of not selling data from their website. They also don’t need to focus on AI, add extensions into people’s webbrowsers, have the capacity to change terms without notifying users, or to add ad tech in the browser without notice. Mozilla has exceeded the goodwill I had for them.

@rejzor@mastodon.social I’ll use a Firefox fork, better they basically have 0 drawbacks compared to Firefox and are at least not subject to Mozilla’s BS, but yeah, it’s a bad situation.

@prlzx@hostux.social I’d be surprised if that was the only reason. Firefox didn’t need that since its inception, and right when they announce a pivot towards AI, they’d suddenly needs terms of use?
Way too close to be a coincidence, IMO

@clairie@mastodon.social No worries ! I don’t even think they were actively discriminatory either, it’s just a result of « Gnome devs wrote guidelines » resulting in inherently biased stuff.
Nothing harmful, and they even asked devs for feedback, so it’s all good !

@clairie@mastodon.social Oh yeah, and I was just reporting on the fact that multiple developers complained about this. I don’t have strong feelings on the issue personally, it’s just a banner.

I just think it’s weird to enforce icons styles in the App Store for « Linux ». Not up to them to say what’s good or not :)

@clairie@mastodon.social Not too much or too little detail in the icon (subjective and shouldn’t be up to flathub), no baked in shadows in icons, « in line with contemporary styles », not allowing explained screenshots with text or information around the app window (even Apple allows this)… Forcing screenshots to have rounded corners as well?

I totally want more streamlining, but this is de facto excluding so many current apps that would have to change their icon just to be on flathub…

@clairie Oh I do want guidelines and standards, but the guidelines on icons are too much

@clairie I didn’t “rant” about it…

Look it up, it’s well documented. Basically, flathub guidelines meant that something like Okular and many other apps from KDE (and other desktops) could never be featured, because their icons are too “realistic”.
Gnome icons aren’t skeuomorphic at all, they’re flat, simple colored, and don’t look real at all, compared to breeze app icons.

As an example, even people working on Flathub remarked that thyis was an issue: https://discourse.flathub.org/t/app-developer-feedback-about-quality-guidelines/8037

@danielcasanueva@mastodon.social yeah, YT recommendations have dropped off a cliff in 2024

@gregortactac@toot.si @Alejandro_P@mathstodon.xyz Fun fact: I ramble just as much in real life, must be a French thing!

@Arcticulate@toot.community No, the YT video says 600K dollars, not euros :)

@Alejandro_P@mathstodon.xyz Oh yeah, I ramble quite a lot

And here is the audio podcast:

https://podcast.thelinuxexp.com/@tlenewspodcast/episodes/flathub-separates-from-gnome-arch-gets-500k-firefox-drops-do-not-track

@haui_lemmy @helenslunch The EU generally has the right idea but is often pretty bad at writing « ironclad » laws. I’m pretty sure most of the people writing these texts have very little experience in tech, and they tend to leave gaping holes that big tech companies are quick to exploit.

Still, in general, they’re doing a solid job at curbing the power and abuses of these companies. It just takes longer than it should to patch the holes!