@BRIAN_____ Don't exaggerate. A decade ago was pre-Chrome, Mozilla was between 50 and 100 people (rough memory), more urgent priorities.
@BrendanEich No doubt there are short-term negative effects. I think, in the end, users would benefit more from full disclosure more.
-
-
@BRIAN_____ I doubt that knowing how MS bundled fixes & gamed perception system. Besides likely bad hat attacks on Firefox in your scenario. -
@BrendanEich I don't mean to say that people should use full disclosure just for Firefox. I mean that everything should be full disclosure. -
@BRIAN_____ That's plainly unrealistic so bad actors win. You didn't advert to this but I believe you're a realist not idealist. Am I wrong? -
@BrendanEich I think what I'm proposing isn't too different from what Microsoft experienced in the 90's. Windows security is better for it. -
@BRIAN_____ I'd love to hear from MS, but you're still ignoring the game theory. MS had OS monopoly on PC. Firefox restarted browser market. -
@BRIAN_____ Once restarted, competition favors non-disclosure, and well-funded vendors capture researchers. Maybe you are an idealist :-P. -
@BrendanEich Just a capitalist. -
@BRIAN_____ We weren't talking econ (+all materialist idealist systems are BS). As for Windows in the '90s, beware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_fallacy …. - 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.