Title worried me for a moment that they were dropping Steam Input; happy to see they seem intent on the opposite.
Well this is a tremendous step in the wrong direction. The economic problem is the ad supported model in the first place, no matter how it's run. This is the same thing Google does, they keep user data to themselves and sell the ad placement. So now Mozilla has the same economic incentives as Google. Unfathomably bad move.
The moment that shocked me was when printers, network cards, and even motherboard integrated Ethernet didn't work on Windows without driver downloads but Linux was plug and play. Full reversal of the situation.
If you read carefully this is actually very similar to the Steam news. I doubt Valve or GOG care, but generally the games are "sold" by the publisher as non transferable licenses for you to play them. So the part that matters isn't up to them.
Note the versions, none of the results give you the official operators page for the current version, 16. They give 9, which went EOL in 2021.
Have you tried recent models? They're not perfect no, but they can usually get you most of the way there if not all the way. If you know how to structure the problem and prompt, granted.
Them using Google indexes anonymously isn't intending to solve the problem you think it is. It's more about incentive structures. Google's "free" search optimizes for ad revenue now. The API access doesn't as much, and Kagi certainly doesn't have an ad incentive. So privacy is a nice bonus, but the real benefit is a customer serving incentive structure.
Wonder how we should interpret the country "XD" being on the list. As far as I can tell its never been used for any real country.
A major caveat I've noticed some people misunderstand: it's corporate CLAs that are problematic. The Apache Foundation also requires contributors sign a CLA, but it's to provide a legal fail safe and a way to update to say Apache 3.0 if need be one day. Apache's non profit, open source mission aligns with respecting the rights of contributors and the community. Corporations, on the other hand, not so much.
Codeberg is run off of donations, they have no service contract revenue. Nobody, much less a volunteer, wants to commit to a 5 or 10 year service plan like that, it's not sustainable for a small project from a non profit.
CLAs can be abusive, but not necessarily. Apache Foundation contributors need to sign CLAs, which essentially codify in contract form the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. It's a precaution, in case some jurisdiction doesn't uphold the passive licensing scheme used otherwise. There's also a relicensing clause, but that's restricted to keeping in spirit, they can't close the source.
I use Kagi, they provide access to all the main models in a chat interface and have a mode that feeds search engine results to them. It's mostly replaced search engines for me. For programming work I find them very useful for using unfamiliar tools and libraries, I can ask it what I want to so and it'll generally tell me how correctly. Importantly, the search engine mode has citations. $25 a month, but worth it.
This must be pandering to shareholders, no company in their right mind would want to compete when Meta is selling their first party headset at a giant loss.
I was in a similar position and moved to Proton. Their native Linux support is rudimentary, but nobody else provides a better, privacy respecting option. Their web apps work well though, and the email client uses local storage APIs for offline use and search.
I do use Mega for cloud storage though, they're e2ee and have solid Linux (both GUI and really nice CLI) and mobile support.
After doing some Meta/Facebook VR development in my job the lack of popularity made increasingly more sense. In brief, they're both incredibly incompetent and transparently greedy.
I'm honestly baffled how they could spend so many tens of billions of dollars and have such bad software, it is completely bug ridden. You'll hit a bug, research it, and find out it's a major know bug for literal years they haven't fixed. They care so little that they couldn't bother to update the Oculus branding to Meta for over 3 years in various software tools and libraries.
Their greed might be more salient aspect preventing adoption, though. They transparently wanted to be the gatekeepers to everything "metaverse" related, a business model that is now explicitly illegal in the EU after years of being merely very sketchy. They are straight up hostile to anyone else trying to implement enterprise or business features. Concrete example: fleet management software, aka MDM. There are third party tools that are cheaper and much more featured than Meta's solution, but in the last year they've pushed hard to kick those third parties out of the ecosystem.
I could go on, but in short nobody in their right mind would build a major business on their ecosystem. They'd rather let Meta burn billions in R&D and come back later. Besides, not even Meta is able to make money in the area now.
Have you used it recently? Previous versions I would've agreed, but 5.0 was a huge improvement. If I didn't know, I'd likely have assumed it to be a native feature.
I'll take a look at Vivaldi's approach though, I've heard good things about those features previously.
If you want vertical tabs with the ability to organize them in trees I suggest the Sideberry extension. It legitimately makes me nervous that the functionality would ever go away, it improves my productivity so much.
You can bookmark trees, collapse them, search them, load/unload them manually, I could go on. It makes it easy to organize dozens or hundreds of tabs. I have some trees for emails, news, forums, projects, etc. When I'm done just fold it up: the top tab bar can hide tabs that aren't in the active tree you're using, so you can still navigate the tabs normally.
GNOME always seemed like an odd choice considering how little customization is available. It feels like a prescriptive approach, you will use your computer the way GNOME feels is appropriate, whereas KDE tries to accommodate however you want to use your computer.
The idea that "it's ok cause we'd do the same" is ridiculous. There is no comparison: China is an authoritarian government and the parent company is practically an arm of the state. There are legitimate criticisms of American tech companies obviously, but they're ultimately subject to the market and democratic governments. We shouldn't be doing any business with authoritarians in the first place, much less inviting them to control a significant social media app in the guise of a legitimate business.