All web browsers have semi hidden pages like this for all sorts of purposes. Its not really intended to be secret, its just not stuff worth even adding to a file menu. Some of the about: pages in firefox are in some submenus, some on settings, but def not all. Tho you'll fimd them mentioned and linked in support guides.
If anything, the ability to access these is better than them being blocked...
Was never much of an opera user, but I have enjoyed vivaldi quite a bit. I don't see myself using vivaldi due to the chromium aspect. I used to keep it around for the random chrome-only sites but that's way too uncommom nowadays.
Lately safari/gnome web (i.e. WebKit engine) have gotten good enough to be my pwa installer browser depending on my OS, though i really hope firefox re-implements PWA support sooner than later.
No, but if its prohibitively impossible to do so, people with legitimate good ideas will never be able to do anything about it. Barriers to entry only serve the wealthy.
I'm not in a rush to move over from K-9, but once they add account sync with desktop to the mobile app I'll def be migrating. Getting to be a bit of a pain to manage Thunderbird on a few PC's + phone and i'm very much looking forward to simplifying all of that
The main thing they want testing for is the migration tool from a k-9 app installed and configured already on the device, which would be net new code.
I, personally, think that you should not have a website if you can't pay for it yourself
You might want to consider how expensive web hosting can be, depending on the content and traffic. A belief like that can shut out a huge portion of the world from being able to even bother with a web site. Even a simple blog can get very expensive due to traffic. Maybe not expensive enough for your average 1st world individual... But that still excludes a large portion of the population with internet access.
Very unlikely. They will support new extension API's (they are already 90%+ compatible with manifest v3) bit Mozilla has committed to maintaining compatibility for the manifest v2 API's that don't exist in v3.
Claims otherwise are FUD.
Even of they reduced everything down to just Firefox, Thunderbird, and all in infra to run those products (Mozilla accounts, addons stores, hosting, dev/build services...), as well as continuing to pay for dev time on open source they use/contribute to, and the time their employees put into w3c and other foundation/standards/steering initiatives, I don't think you'd want to see the cost of a monthly subscription.
This stuff costs way more than people think it does, and behind the scenes Mozilla does a lot of work (with google, Microsoft, apple) on web standards, and trust me, you want them still involved seeing as each other browser group involved is well... You know... Much worse for privacy generally.
YouTube premium and kagi aren't even remotely in the same league for comparison when it comes to the cost and value a "Firefox" or "Mozilla" subscription would be.
If Mozilla starts being aggressive to ad blocking, I'll agree with the common opinion on this post. But for now I'm more less neutral. If the choice is Mozilla dies or they do some ad stuff, I'd rather the latter. Whether the current and former people running Mozilla have made the right decisions or not to get to this point is kind of irrelevant, because people do not want Mozilla to disappear (even if they claim otherwise) because Mozilla is still a major driver of privacy-oriented work in w3c and web in general.
Aside from that... The only real way to stop ads and tracking, or at least prevent selling and sharing of data outside of the 1st party collector, is a legal path. Whether Anonym/Mozilla is as private as they are claiming, their intent is at least what a realistic legal solution to web tracking would condone that would continue to allow for revenue via ads. There is no way ads will ever go away in a capitalist economy, so it'll need to do something, blocked or not.
American Libertarians (in case you aren't familiar or for anyone else with the sentiment) tend to be very conservative compared to lowercase libertarianism as a whole, and especially compared to European libertarianism. Much more focused on classical liberalism, but also more likely to lean towards selfish solutions than community solutions.
Idk if you've had the pleasure of /r/libertarian on reddit, but that place was always conservative as hell with little room for anyone of the libertarian-socialist persuasion to have an opinion or any desire to come up with group-based solutions.
Google does a really good job convincing you they care with the shuttle system, cafeterias, break spaces, and otherwise.
It convinces you to work more than you would otherwise, too (sure, why not finish up that task on the shuttle with WiFi... Hey I'll just grab food here instead of go home. Food at home cost money anyway... Lemme just finish that thing before heading home now that I've had dinner...)
So the site should just... Not work in firefox then?
A lot of the sites in the about:compat block or don't work in Firefox because the sites don't follow web standards