Welcome to the botnet

>These journals are reliable
>Why?
>Because we said they are, if they're not on our list they're conservative fake news
>But aren't you a massively left-leaning company that actively promotes far-left wing extremist policies?
>That's just what a fake news provider would say

who fucking cares it's just a browser lol

>6 (six) percent market share
wow thats it trump is finished now

who gives a fuck about firefox now?

File: jew20d.jpg (132KB, 640x423px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 640x423px

>credible news-gathering such as Le Mond, The Wall Street Journal...

>thinks this is about left and right

Die if you not going to even try to smarten up.

File: 1502436143074.jpg (32KB, 308x326px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 308x326px

>>61939775
Literally mgs2

>>61939638
>These journals are reliable
>Why?
Because they're actual fucking journals, as opposed to websites run by some fat fuck in his basement. Now fuck off back to /pol/, this is a leftist-communist-trotskyist-maoist board.

File: Table.png (455KB, 340x2601px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 340x2601px

>>61939855
>leftists aren't jews
>leftists and jews aren't publicly declaring war on society for hundreds of years
what did radical centrism mean by this?

>>61939620
So, what is botnet about this?

Also, while some of their wording is pretty stupid, backing up news with facts is a thing we should be striving for. So they are coming from a good place, But knowing Mozilla they will focus 99.99% of attacking right wing false news while ignoring the left leaning false news.

>>61939964
>So they are coming from a good place,
That's the way it always starts out. These nerds and geeky engineers have good intentions, then the capitalists will swoop in and use it for censorship. Their "tolerance over hate" statement is especially haunting. Some 1984 shit.

>they will focus 99.99% of attacking right wing false news while ignoring the left leaning false news.
Agreed. Any news that doesn't support the current political agenda, no matter how true it is, will be labeled as "untrustworthy" or "misinformation" and discredited on a wide scale, while actual "fake news" with is beneficial will be allowed to pass.

Slippery slope

>>61939638
true

>>61939885
ennd yourself sjw faggot

>>61940153
I doubt they will go that far. I think they will try to get rid of actual fake news that dosn't have facts backing it up and not just try to randomly censor stuff they don't like, facts or not. It would just discredit and kill of the entire project before it got off. I just think this will be more of a if you say I "I want to kill all niggers" on twitter you will probably get your twitter banned and perhaps even arrested for hate speech, while someone saying "I want to kill all white people" will just be ignored type thing.

>>61939885
And what makes that more credible?

>>61940225
Yeah true, I didn't mean to give my second example so definitively. And I agree it will probably be used to censor speech which goes against stuff like race mixing. Stuff that nobody can object to without being demonized. Basically censorship without any threat of repercussions.