Its most recent update (146) froze my computer, and when I went to downgrade, it turns out that they are now doing "downgrade protection," whereby you are blocked from your profile (with your carefully assembled system of settings) and have to create a new profile. They call your no longer being able to do things PROTECTION.
Well, I did create a new profile after downgrading to the latest ESR version (140.6), turned off automatic updates (you need to do it very fast after installing an old version because it immediately begins downloading a new update), and I guess Mozilla is off my list of software providers one could more or less trust.
(you need to do it very fast after installing an old version because it immediately begins downloading a new update)
Download the installer for your desired legacy version of Firefox.
Disable your network adapter.
Install your desired legacy version of Firefox.
Launch your desired legacy version of Firefox.
Take your time disabling automatic updates on this copy of Firefox, because Firefox isn't going to be able to update through your disabled network adapter.
Well, yeah, I guess I would have come to this genius idea of disabling the network on my own when push came to shove (I remember the fun I used to have when I managed to buy a Windows-based laptop early in the Windows XP lifecycle when they haven't yet fixed a certain vulnerability that left your system at exactly 50% chance of either getting or not getting a worm that made the system unusable; many a reinstall from my licensed CD, I had to do twice because I forgot to make sure to not connect to the Internet before I ran the fixes I had on a separate "restore my setup" CD).
But re Brave, thanks but no thanks, their monetization strategy seems highly fishy (which has been mentioned a lot).
The web is dead. There are no ethical browsers. Any browser built on Chromium is contributing to the erosion of open web standards even if the browser built around that rendering engine allows for privacy.
There is nothing worse than a Manager using AI to try to manage a job they don't understand or have never done before. These kinds of people then go to the CEOs with statistics sheets that look good but say nonsense, on top of just scheduling meetings with everyone 24h beforehand because they can't plan anything properly, making impossible promises upstairs and would never hear that they don't know the difference between a duck and a chicken.
CEOs of companies that are having shareholders are not the same kind of CEOs than those in a company without shareholders tho.
Money, and the obligations around it are most often the center of the problem. Having leadership making bad decisions because of it is another problem.
And he already double down on AI and said he was thinking about killing ad blocks.
Those two things are what Firefox users are sceptical/hate, Mozilla have to know it. And he is so open about it?
He must have been inserted into mozilla to harm firefox.
Given Mozilla's leadership's utter incompetence in grabbing market share by leaning into what makes them special, I think this is more that terrible decision makers chose another CEO that reflects their thoughts and values.
For an institution that should be set up to be as loved as the Internet Archive or Wikipedia, they sure are trying their best to be an unimportant footnote of internet history.
Unfortunately adds help websites run but adds are also horrifically predatory. Add blockers keep your computer free off all the horrible stuff that makes websites hard to navigate but those adds are all thats keeping the website free for viewers at all. Perhaps a balance needs to be struck. I don’t blame the guy for trying to find one in Firefox.
The occassional banner ad at the top of the page, 2004-style, I can handle, but anything more than that, and I'm not going to the website anymore without an adblocker. Some people will be more or less strict than me. There's no way to balance it, as websites will always find loopholes to cramp more ads in.
I have never once in my life run ad blocker ever. You can put ads all over my content and guess what my brain tunes all of that out when I focus on the content all I see is the content the ads around the content as long as they're not actively over top of my content I could care less about them being there my brain can turn that out my brain is different from a lot of people's brains though my wife always wonders how I can have three sources of audio on at the same time and be focused on all of them. And yet for whatever reason I can't listen to music and play a video game at the same time unless it's the specific music of that video game.
Where you gonna go? Safari is not feasible for most people and literally all Chromium based browsers are acting as little Trojan horses for Google’s erosion of web standards. It’s over.
At some point, though, Enzor-DeMeo will have to tend to Mozilla’s own business. “I do think we need revenue diversification away from Google,” he says, “but I don’t necessarily believe we need revenue diversification away from the browser.” It seems he thinks a combination of subscription revenue, advertising, and maybe a few search and AI placement deals can get that done. He’s also bullish that things like built-in VPN and a privacy service called Monitor can get more people to pay for their browser. He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission.
Yeah I don't see the statements "He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission" and "has considered" incompatible in this context.
He has considered it - but doesn't like the idea. Agree with your sentiment - dumb to raise it.
Where are you getting the (for now) concept. Are you twisting his narrative or does he give that impression in the interview? I read the same link you have and don't get that vibe. Are you adding this for yourself, or did you get it from some where?
He's serious enough about the idea to have run the numbers. So the decision to not do it was a long process, not an instant rejection. He could always go back.
This kinda feels like Google screwing around with Android to make it more like iOS like with the recent thing about blocking apps from outside the Play Store without certifications or whatever, why the hell would I want to use Android or Firefox if they’re just going to be shittier copies of iOS and Chrome anyway? Bloody hell.
Hard agree. As a long-time iOS user for daily devices, I have cheap android devices for more technical needs and was planning to switch to android on my next daily device. Now, however, I'm not sure I'll do that. I'll wait around and see if it becomes a shittier iOS first.
This is the entire reason I migrated away from Chrome. I now use Firefox on everything. I tell everyone to use Firefox. Even on my client's computers I've installed Firefox for them and they like it. Don't make me switch again.
Why not just make a bare-bones basic web browser that can be infinitely extended with add-ons, but otherwise is the web browser equivalent of a debian net install image?
Like I would happily pay real money upfront as a one time fee for an ultra generic, no bells or whistles out of the box but extendable with add-ons, web browser. You could have ad block, tabbed browsing, password management, all as optional add-ons.
Modern HTML and JavaScript specs are so complex that even that so-called bare-bones web browser (that works with the entire modern web) would easily be a billion-dollar project.
Billions of people are having trouble paying for three meals a day due to post-COVID global hyperinflation and you expect them to pay for a software category that has been free forever. It's not going to happen.
Are you fucking kidding me? This was the entire reason I switched back to Firefox this year. If they think I won't switch again then they're gonna find out
What am I missing? It sounds like he considered it and determined it wasn’t a good fit. It’d be better if he took a stronger stance, but it sounds like his decision was what everyone here wants.
It’s the fact that he considered it and said he could do it even if he decided against it. How do we know he won’t change his mind? If it is against the mission, why even consider it? Is there a limit after which it would override the mission? It introduces a ton of questions which erodes trust and introduces doubt.
There’s no way they weren’t going to run the numbers on something like this, even if it wasn’t a serious consideration. That’s what business analysts do so that when people ask them questions they can give informed answers.
No it's not, it would be irresponsible of them to not run the numbers. They just have to remember that people use them for that reason and changing it wouldn't bring the expected revenue
There are certain premises so egregious that you shouldn't ever run the numbers on them. You would never run the numbers on selling your mother into sexual slavery, for example. This is just as egregious.
… it’s not remotely in the same league. It’s a product decision that has competitors, including forking its current state. It’s a product decision I hope they never make, but it’s not the end of the world if they do, it’s just the end of anyone wanting to use new versions of that product.
You forget the presumption of innocence. Until and unless you get convicted of a crime, you're not a criminal. And in certain jurisdictions, this sort of thing just isn't a big deal.
People did not just somehow end up using Firefox out of convenience; the user base is exclusively comprised of people who intentionally went out of our their way to use a non-default browser. Why they think they have the power to strong arm that group of people is beyond me.
OP is being a bit deceptive. The CEO said he considered it and didn’t want to do it. It doesn’t mean he won’t, but it sounds like he’s saying they won’t for now.
Thanks for the heads up Mr CEO, I was already planning on changing browsers after the AI announcement, now I will definitely be doing so as soon as possible.
I wouldn’t say it’s identical, at least functionally and for an out of box experience due to features like resist fingerprinting which can break websites
This is inaccurate. The Founders Fund (which Thiel is a part of) is a minority investor. Thiel personally has little to no say in the direction of product and service development.
Nor is anybody's say really needed. Brave's founder and CEO, Brendan Eich, is also the co-founder and ex-CEO of Mozilla and the inventor of JavaScript. The guy is a genius. He knows what he's doing.
Don't forget about Brave's CEO's anti LGBTQ activities and privacy concerns.
There's a couple of possible new browsers in the works: Ladybird and Servo. Until they become usable, then there's stuff like LibreWolf or Waterfox (Firefox forks) or ungoogled chromium (chrome fork).
If you apply this sort of political purity test to everyone who works on every product and service in the modern world, you will end up back in a cave.
this asshole is already playing around with these anti privacy ideas which i noticed awhile back, so I already abondoned ship like 3 years ago and not coming back cause hes making it worse and worse. didnt I read he got a fat paycheck/bonus?
you know ff isnt pro privacy because if you install it as is, it leaks everything. you have to sit at least an hour to harden it.
imo, this is all leveraged from google. this only helps google. they say "disable adblockers and thatll help us. well slip a fatter envelope under the table"
cmon, lady luck . double or nothing on ladybird. dont let us down!!!
cmon mozilla, I dare you to implement that..cmon, do it.
Yeah. The people who just use Firefox because their kids installed it for them or it came with their Linux distro must be a very low percentage of users. The browser would die overnight if they removed adblockers.
Garuda Linux has FireDragon derived from Floorp derived from Firefox but I’m not sure what the Firefox derivatives will be doing in the future. Garuda also developed their own meta search engine.
DDG is microsoft. garbage. they use openAi which is microsoft. they play it off like they arent connected but its a sister company made to look like it isnt
"Mozilla's new CEO has considered destroying their product and company for paltry short term gains."
He's about to pull a Jack Welsh
Goodbye. What a lack of vision.
Its most recent update (146) froze my computer, and when I went to downgrade, it turns out that they are now doing "downgrade protection," whereby you are blocked from your profile (with your carefully assembled system of settings) and have to create a new profile. They call your no longer being able to do things PROTECTION.
Well, I did create a new profile after downgrading to the latest ESR version (140.6), turned off automatic updates (you need to do it very fast after installing an old version because it immediately begins downloading a new update), and I guess Mozilla is off my list of software providers one could more or less trust.
Well, yeah, I guess I would have come to this genius idea of disabling the network on my own when push came to shove (I remember the fun I used to have when I managed to buy a Windows-based laptop early in the Windows XP lifecycle when they haven't yet fixed a certain vulnerability that left your system at exactly 50% chance of either getting or not getting a worm that made the system unusable; many a reinstall from my licensed CD, I had to do twice because I forgot to make sure to not connect to the Internet before I ran the fixes I had on a separate "restore my setup" CD).
But re Brave, thanks but no thanks, their monetization strategy seems highly fishy (which has been mentioned a lot).
I'm waiting for Ladybird.
You don't have to participate in their crypto ecosystem. You can just use the browser.
You'll be waiting a long time.
Okay duckduckgo, you're up.
The web is dead. There are no ethical browsers. Any browser built on Chromium is contributing to the erosion of open web standards even if the browser built around that rendering engine allows for privacy.
Long live the web.
When the bubble pops, it's gonna so fun definitely remember how they treat us
The biggest problem in this world is CEOs.🙄
Management teams, and bad AI usage.
There is nothing worse than a Manager using AI to try to manage a job they don't understand or have never done before. These kinds of people then go to the CEOs with statistics sheets that look good but say nonsense, on top of just scheduling meetings with everyone 24h beforehand because they can't plan anything properly, making impossible promises upstairs and would never hear that they don't know the difference between a duck and a chicken.
CEOs of companies that are having shareholders are not the same kind of CEOs than those in a company without shareholders tho.
Money, and the obligations around it are most often the center of the problem. Having leadership making bad decisions because of it is another problem.
Is he ACTIVELY trying to kill Firefox?
No, seriously.
Two days on the job!
And he already double down on AI and said he was thinking about killing ad blocks. Those two things are what Firefox users are sceptical/hate, Mozilla have to know it. And he is so open about it?
He must have been inserted into mozilla to harm firefox.
Given Mozilla's leadership's utter incompetence in grabbing market share by leaning into what makes them special, I think this is more that terrible decision makers chose another CEO that reflects their thoughts and values.
For an institution that should be set up to be as loved as the Internet Archive or Wikipedia, they sure are trying their best to be an unimportant footnote of internet history.
Unfortunately adds help websites run but adds are also horrifically predatory. Add blockers keep your computer free off all the horrible stuff that makes websites hard to navigate but those adds are all thats keeping the website free for viewers at all. Perhaps a balance needs to be struck. I don’t blame the guy for trying to find one in Firefox.
The occassional banner ad at the top of the page, 2004-style, I can handle, but anything more than that, and I'm not going to the website anymore without an adblocker. Some people will be more or less strict than me. There's no way to balance it, as websites will always find loopholes to cramp more ads in.
I have never once in my life run ad blocker ever. You can put ads all over my content and guess what my brain tunes all of that out when I focus on the content all I see is the content the ads around the content as long as they're not actively over top of my content I could care less about them being there my brain can turn that out my brain is different from a lot of people's brains though my wife always wonders how I can have three sources of audio on at the same time and be focused on all of them. And yet for whatever reason I can't listen to music and play a video game at the same time unless it's the specific music of that video game.
I'm just a strange man
Time to abandon Firefox if you haven't already!
Where you gonna go? Safari is not feasible for most people and literally all Chromium based browsers are acting as little Trojan horses for Google’s erosion of web standards. It’s over.
Already abandoned FF, don’t care
Alternative?
So he doesn't want people to use Firefox?
Mozilla's new CEO can go fuck himself
Who the fuck hired this guy?
The board. He's an "industry disrupter" and his MBA means he will continue to make line go up at ANY cost
Is Boston Consulting Group in the room with us. ow?
CEO of a company with an easy-to-replace product that makes most of its revenue from people who hate ads: let's show people ads
Did you read the article or are you stupid?
To even bring up the idea was him shooting himself in the foot.
Yeah I don't see the statements "He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission" and "has considered" incompatible in this context.
He has considered it - but doesn't like the idea. Agree with your sentiment - dumb to raise it.
I don't understand what your problem is.
Where are you getting the (for now) concept. Are you twisting his narrative or does he give that impression in the interview? I read the same link you have and don't get that vibe. Are you adding this for yourself, or did you get it from some where?
He's serious enough about the idea to have run the numbers. So the decision to not do it was a long process, not an instant rejection. He could always go back.
This kinda feels like Google screwing around with Android to make it more like iOS like with the recent thing about blocking apps from outside the Play Store without certifications or whatever, why the hell would I want to use Android or Firefox if they’re just going to be shittier copies of iOS and Chrome anyway? Bloody hell.
Hard agree. As a long-time iOS user for daily devices, I have cheap android devices for more technical needs and was planning to switch to android on my next daily device. Now, however, I'm not sure I'll do that. I'll wait around and see if it becomes a shittier iOS first.
This would be extremely shortsighted of them, that $150 million they would make would be if all the ad blocking people stayed, which they wouldn’t.
I'll give up YouTube before going back to ads and I only really use Firefox because it can block the ads.
Shhhhh don't tell, but, adBlockBrowser on the play store for Youtube
Time to go back to BBSes lol
Well, sure, but that's always been true, right?
It's certainly a different vibe when all the people are hobbyists, and there's no serious corporate aspect to any BBS, at this point.
This is the entire reason I migrated away from Chrome. I now use Firefox on everything. I tell everyone to use Firefox. Even on my client's computers I've installed Firefox for them and they like it. Don't make me switch again.
This.
I went back to Firefox for similar reasons and I keep recommending to switch for everyone I know.
Nothing will be spared from the enshittification done by the geniuses of finance it seems.
https://librewolf.net/
they should make a more general version with out all the "hardcore" privacy features like auto delete of browser history
Guess so.
It can be nice to have stuff like browser history, stored passwords etc that might introduce some risk.
Have not studied the features of Librewolf, just wanted to show that there are alternatives at the ready if needed.
I will wait. I am not jumping ship unless they act on what they said.
Same, and if it happens I will also considder other options like Vivaldi.
I used Chrome until they made it unconvenient to use uBlock.
The day they shut down uBlock Origin is the day I uninstall.
This is just it. This is by far the biggest reason I solely use Firefox. If they axe it, I'll very quickly move on to something else.
Why not just make a bare-bones basic web browser that can be infinitely extended with add-ons, but otherwise is the web browser equivalent of a debian net install image?
Like I would happily pay real money upfront as a one time fee for an ultra generic, no bells or whistles out of the box but extendable with add-ons, web browser. You could have ad block, tabbed browsing, password management, all as optional add-ons.
Modern HTML and JavaScript specs are so complex that even that so-called bare-bones web browser (that works with the entire modern web) would easily be a billion-dollar project.
So like the cost of $.12 from everybody on earth that would benefit? Seems like a steal
Good luck getting people to pay for a browser.
Why wouldn’t they? They pay for the imaginary currencies in the mindnumbing games they play on said browser.
You could literally add one of those games to the browser by default and the people buying game currency would more than fund the project lol
Billions of people are having trouble paying for three meals a day due to post-COVID global hyperinflation and you expect them to pay for a software category that has been free forever. It's not going to happen.
Are you fucking kidding me? This was the entire reason I switched back to Firefox this year. If they think I won't switch again then they're gonna find out
Seriously? Are they trying to make us ditch Firefox too? 99% of Firefox users would stop using Firefox if they did this, so they'd make close to $0.
Hey come buy my new box, “How to kill your own web browser instantly”
Relax, Mozilla, I'm already leaving, you don't need to convince me!
But... that's literally reason to use firefox...
They do that and they'll lose me as a customer going back to the pre Netscape times...
Ditto. I'll go use one of the Firefox branches that actually care about users or ungoogled chromium instead.
Enshitification continues
They certainly seem to be trying to skip all the way to the end step, though.
Oh really? Well I've considered never using Firefox again, how about that?
I just wish you can use a back up to migrate your settings to another browser
You can already do this between all major browsers.
So just a backup from Firefox and I can migrate to like say librewolf? (Its a fork I know but curious)
What am I missing? It sounds like he considered it and determined it wasn’t a good fit. It’d be better if he took a stronger stance, but it sounds like his decision was what everyone here wants.
It’s the fact that he considered it and said he could do it even if he decided against it. How do we know he won’t change his mind? If it is against the mission, why even consider it? Is there a limit after which it would override the mission? It introduces a ton of questions which erodes trust and introduces doubt.
It's kinda the reality that every single browser out there can do this.
And of course if it's open source you can fork it, but even that means someone new takes up the mantle and can make the same decision eventually.
I guess we could ask him to lie to make us feel better about it though.
Considering it seriously enough to run the numbers is bad news.
There’s no way they weren’t going to run the numbers on something like this, even if it wasn’t a serious consideration. That’s what business analysts do so that when people ask them questions they can give informed answers.
https://www.reddit.com/r/enshittification/comments/1pp5no7/comment/nulwlv2/
No it's not, it would be irresponsible of them to not run the numbers. They just have to remember that people use them for that reason and changing it wouldn't bring the expected revenue
There are certain premises so egregious that you shouldn't ever run the numbers on them. You would never run the numbers on selling your mother into sexual slavery, for example. This is just as egregious.
… it’s not remotely in the same league. It’s a product decision that has competitors, including forking its current state. It’s a product decision I hope they never make, but it’s not the end of the world if they do, it’s just the end of anyone wanting to use new versions of that product.
So is selling your mother.
No, that’s a crime against humanity. I understand hyperbole but wow these comments are making you look like a crazy person.
I can find you a jurisdiction where the practice is routinely tolerated (even if not technically legal) if criminality is your only concern.
I mean as you pointed out it’s illegal everywhere, which makes it not a product decision so much as a decision to break the law criminally.
You forget the presumption of innocence. Until and unless you get convicted of a crime, you're not a criminal. And in certain jurisdictions, this sort of thing just isn't a big deal.
Lol fucking do it, let's see what happens
People did not just somehow end up using Firefox out of convenience; the user base is exclusively comprised of people who intentionally went out of our their way to use a non-default browser. Why they think they have the power to strong arm that group of people is beyond me.
This just in: Due to public backlash, Mozilla board now considering axing CEO
Is this real?
If it is, maybe the next one will be someone who actually uses firefox
That should really be a requirement.
OP is being a bit deceptive. The CEO said he considered it and didn’t want to do it. It doesn’t mean he won’t, but it sounds like he’s saying they won’t for now.
That's exactly what I wrote.
You said considering as if it was ongoing. He already made the decision
Improve your reading comprehension.
Fair. I misread. So much insults.
There isn't a single insult in this entire thread. Improve your reading comprehension.
“There isn’t a single insult in this entire thread. Improve your reading comprehension.” The irony of that comment is staggering.
The only irony is that you don't seem to know what an insult is.
Kinda seems like you don’t.
Thanks for the heads up Mr CEO, I was already planning on changing browsers after the AI announcement, now I will definitely be doing so as soon as possible.
What's a good alternative on Linux these days?
[deleted]
I wouldn’t say it’s identical, at least functionally and for an out of box experience due to features like resist fingerprinting which can break websites
Brave's main selling point is integrated ad blocking so they're definitely not removing that feature anytime soon.
I really like brave on iOS so I was thinking it would be a good move
Brave is heavily funded by Peter Theil.
We are running out of options guys!
This is inaccurate. The Founders Fund (which Thiel is a part of) is a minority investor. Thiel personally has little to no say in the direction of product and service development.
Nor is anybody's say really needed. Brave's founder and CEO, Brendan Eich, is also the co-founder and ex-CEO of Mozilla and the inventor of JavaScript. The guy is a genius. He knows what he's doing.
Peter Theil was Co-Founder of Founders Fund. Call him a minority all you want.... Hey, whatever helps you sleep at night man.
You kinda sound like you have your nose up Mr. T., nah. Nevermind.
If the only way you can win the argument is by misrepresenting the facts, you've already lost.
Don't forget about Brave's CEO's anti LGBTQ activities and privacy concerns.
There's a couple of possible new browsers in the works: Ladybird and Servo. Until they become usable, then there's stuff like LibreWolf or Waterfox (Firefox forks) or ungoogled chromium (chrome fork).
If you apply this sort of political purity test to everyone who works on every product and service in the modern world, you will end up back in a cave.
So? What does that have to do with how good a product it is?
Do you know who Peter Thiel is?
Yes, I do. All tech VC investors are shitty people, he's not measurably worse than the rest. Just more publicly visible.
If you're going to use any software in 2025, it comes with the territory.
Google Peter Theil + Palantir
Will find another browser the second this happens.
this asshole is already playing around with these anti privacy ideas which i noticed awhile back, so I already abondoned ship like 3 years ago and not coming back cause hes making it worse and worse. didnt I read he got a fat paycheck/bonus?
you know ff isnt pro privacy because if you install it as is, it leaks everything. you have to sit at least an hour to harden it.
imo, this is all leveraged from google. this only helps google. they say "disable adblockers and thatll help us. well slip a fatter envelope under the table"
cmon, lady luck . double or nothing on ladybird. dont let us down!!!
cmon mozilla, I dare you to implement that..cmon, do it.
This asshole just became CEO. Some other asshole was CEO before.
They're all assholes.
HAHAHA
Yeah. The people who just use Firefox because their kids installed it for them or it came with their Linux distro must be a very low percentage of users. The browser would die overnight if they removed adblockers.
How much are you willing to pay for another browser?
I’ll probably just switch to LibreWolf
So he wants to kill Firefox, that's what this says to me.
I would immediately switch to anything else
Yep, now just have to find an alternative I like.
I would even use a text-only browser over having to see ads.
Now is the time for Project Gemini to breakout! (Not Google Gemini btw)
That sounds interesting to me as someone who loves RSS feeds but feels like there is some missing potential with them.
So what browser can I switch too?
libre wolf with UBO
Librewolf works as far as I know?
Edge is chrome with adblock
But that one's MS, which feels.... Wrong. Lol
First ai now this. They really did go full retard executive suite
I uninstalled when i heard about AI. They give you a pop up ok why you're uninstalling, feel free to unload there.
I switched to Brave a while ago
Vivaldi
Brave is partly owned by Thiel, another maniacal billionaire.
Fuck, I didn't know that
That’s what I said yesterday when someone told me!
so what do we do then? there's gotta be something else? how is the world this way 😭
Hmm. What do we got besides Firefox? Vivaldi?
libre wolf. waterfox.
move to linux, wait for ladybird. lets see what it brings
Garuda Linux has FireDragon derived from Floorp derived from Firefox but I’m not sure what the Firefox derivatives will be doing in the future. Garuda also developed their own meta search engine.
https://preview.redd.it/5dod90ooqt7g1.png?width=1148&format=png&auto=webp&s=8a72a3ea32ab6df0283565541a62bb9a86360439
Duck Duck Go. At least you can opt out of the AI
There's only a mobile browser for ddg right?
DDG is microsoft. garbage. they use openAi which is microsoft. they play it off like they arent connected but its a sister company made to look like it isnt
Fuck