←back to thread

48 points LorenDB | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
dabinat ◴[] No.44380059[source]
It was discontinued 5 years ago - I’m not sure why it took so long to archive the repo.

https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/future-of-deepspeech-stt-aft...

replies(3): >>44380827 #>>44381149 #>>44381578 #
echelon ◴[] No.44381578[source]
My personal little conspiracy theory is that Google pays Mozilla as an antitrust shield.

A lot of us pretty much assume that much, but I think it goes much deeper.

I think Google pays and maintains a working relationship with the CEO of Mozilla (current and former) to purposely keep the organization rudderless, uncompetitive, and shrinking.

Mozilla spends its money building a 3D VR metaverse here, a bunch of AI models it later scraps over there, a web3 / distributed social program, etc. It scraps Rust, doesn't invest into Firefox. Just silly toys and experiments.

That nice CEO salary is hush money.

Just a fun little pet theory, totally not based on evidence.

replies(4): >>44382081 #>>44382243 #>>44382751 #>>44385024 #
nopelynopington ◴[] No.44385024[source]
Firefox is already an excellent and fast browser and people just don't use it. I think it's a marketing problem. Google, Microsoft, Brave, etc all put a lot of money and resources into promoting their browsers, pushing them at an OS level (with legal care), using ads etc. For Firefox to compete they'd need to spend a lot more of their money marketing and end up building far fewer fun toys and experiments, and they could still never achieve the same level as MS or Google.

I think I'd rather they keep innovating

replies(4): >>44385689 #>>44387106 #>>44387794 #>>44391662 #
1. trod1234 ◴[] No.44391662[source]
People stop using things which don't work or stop working on the regular.

Its not a marketing problem, its a market problem.

The only money in the current market is in ads/surveillance and that's basically a requirement to compete. They can't achieve the same level as MS or Google because of sabotage, and an adverse market.

In some circles its called tortuous interference of a contract, but the bar to prove it is impossibly high so companies can strategically make changes to dependencies that force costs on a competitor as a dominant market player.

Do you know how many times Firefox has had bug tickets opened for Google, and Cloudflare, and others where those companies basically broke the web for everyone on that browser because their silent internal changes to captcha's and other systems didn't play nice with competitors browsers which respect privacy more than others? Change management is a solved problem, so the only reason this happens is because of purposeful asymmetry here where FTC enforcement has failed.

These breakages happens a lot, every few months on the regular going back more than a decade.

How do you attract people's attention to use your browser and deal with the brokenness, when competitors constantly break it? These type of toy projects.