hikosan

Because it is a bloatware. Like, what is the point of using Firefox? It's faster? It was never because of speed. Less RAM usage? No. It was because of privacy. Peoples started hating on Chrome because Google became evil. Then they went after adblockers. Google search became bloated with garbage results, DDG became a better alternative, also marketed as privacy-focused.

It just happens to be that out of all other web browsers, there were no better alternatives, and Firefox seemed the best option at that time. Opera was a spyware. Brave was still fresh. Actually, Brendan Eich, the founder of Brave who also founded Mozilla and created JavaScript, was called out for making an anti-LGBTQ donation, so many people hesitated using Brave when it released. Needless to say, anything Microsoft was hated with a passion.

That's why people need to keep reinventing the wheel.

Absolutely agree on every point. I felt this for the last few years, not just with the latest updates. I haven't updated Firefox for months (a year?), and when I decided to do it after convincing my friend to switch to it because he said he couldn't find the option in settings I told him about, I was basically ~10 versions behind. So updating it and seeing the redesigned settings that looked less intuitive and completely unnecessary, I felt really frustrated.

There's a new browser in the making called Ladybird, I don't know if it's going to be available on Windows (they say the alpha is for Linux and macOS). Yeah, I am on Windows, sadly, and I don't plan on switching to Linux, yet. Mozilla was praised for being a non-profit "good guys", but they've been really annoying, perhaps trying to appeal to the mainstream. Truth is, the mainstream does NOT care about Firefox. You need to spend all your funds on marketing it, not making it uglier with each update.

I do think the consumer market might still look depressing in upcoming years, but I don't think there will be one AI company left. I mean, even if we don't take it literally, like I also wanted to mention how OpenAI gets to build its fabulous data centers while Anthropic just signs partnerships, and both LLMs (ChatGPT and Claude) are good and competitive. And don't forget about FOSS models like DeepSeek.

There is something those companies aren't loud and clear about, like they don't talk about architectural bottlenecks, that what they need is not scaling but an architectural shift. And once photonics enters the game, should we expect the prices[*] to drop or will they justify it by even more compute power.

[*] edit: I mean LLM pricing (tokens), not chips

AFAIK, before AI it was COVID coupled with cryptomining, yet the only thing it hurt was GPU prices going up, not DRAM. Now, we have both GPUs and RAM sticks costing as much as a decent PC that you could build at least two years ago... yeah, I am somewhat hurt over my dream of building a high-end battlestation, which might not come to reality anytime soon.

nobody is going to get sued

I gotta agree with you, because the people who are currently suing memory makers seem to be names I’ve never heard of, maybe they are trying to cut some money for personal profit. But even Valve was frustrated with the way how they are unable to negotiate the prices, it's like only a few companies can (like OAI, Anthropic, SpaceX, etc.), basically the ones who are currently "in control" of stock market prices.

It makes me think of when Epic Games sued Apple: at some point, there could be more "smaller" companies like Valve that would be frustrated with the situation enough to do something about it. Maybe we should boycott the use of AI (unlikely), maybe we should boycott buying next gen consoles (more likely), etc. We can do something about it if we, as a society, become more conscious about the situation, even though conscious consumerism sounds overly optimistic.