Hey @Purism, the conversation @switchingsocial, @akarshanbiswas, and @masterofthetiger are having (https://mastodon.at/@switchingsocial/102717198321863642) is pretty relevant - especially after your (imo terrible) last #PureBrowser rollout.
@Amgine @switchingsocial@mastodon.at @akarshanbiswas@inditoot.com @masterofthetiger@theres.life
How is this relevant to Purism? SS dismissed Purism with similarly weak, ideology-laden arguments and seems to have a blind spot on the more actual problems of Mozilla, that I wish there was a neutral alternative to SS that does not hide projects by personal preference and leaves the choice to the user.
PureBrowser should not have the problems of FF. But I think there was also a mention that they might base on Gnome Web in the future.
The last rollout of PureBrowser was not particularly positive. https://saewyc.ca/l/20
Most of the config reset was to Mozilla's defaults. It even lost uBlock. That is not an argument against Purism; it is a critical comment on their fork considering their principled position on privacy and libre.
I spent some time looking at GNOME Web today, and most of what I see I like. But tell me if you know how to configure the block lists for your language/region/context? Cannot find that.
@Amgine
You make it sound like they intentionally or carelessly did that to you. Staff says there were lots of upstream changes.
Ublock can be reinstalled.
(Not saying it's ideal)
https://forums.puri.sm/t/google-widevine-drm-option-is-grayed-out-in-purebrowser/6844/18
