I believe LibreWolf’s defaults are too strict and slow down adoption. Most options are either : all or nothing. No in-between.

Sadly, I believe the default settings are too strict and will slow down adoption by the mass, which would in term bring a better anonymity set.

It’s not a great alternative to Firefox because LibreWolf is just not usable for the daily user: no DRM, no cookies, no history, websites that break… The browser should let the user choose:

  • Maximum compatibility (more tracking)
  • Mid-option (like a modded firefox but without the annoyances like cookies not being stored, having a fixed size, or forced light-mode/timezone)
  • Best privacy (pretty much the current mode)

I find myself forced to edit the default settings which is a huge privacy/fingerprinting risk. If we create ‘settings groups’, yes, the privacy will be hurt, but at least we will be more in each group.

What do you think about this?

    • azalty@jlai.luOPEnglish
      43·
      23 hours ago

      Then it’ll never truly rise, if it’s for really a really small niche

      • kobra@lemm.ee
        11·
        22 hours ago

        Yep. It doesn’t even have auto updates so unless you actively use a package manager, people are likely going to miss security updates anyway.

        I don’t think it’s meant to be a mass adoption browser. It fills a niche and it fills it pretty well.

      • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        7·
        22 hours ago

        Not everything is meant to. It was made for a specific purpose and works for that purpose.

        It seems to be doing just fine to me.