916
Good luck figuring it out since it also doesn’t come with man pages (lemmy.world)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/memes@sopuli.xyz
133 comments fedilink hide all child comments
😂 1 🤪 1
 

Edit: As @bdonvr@thelemmy.club points out below

  1. This is just a mascot and is not a new logo
  2. The blog referencing Mozilla’s statement on the mascots gender says, (he/she/they/them/it), use whatever pronoun you prefer.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 78 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

By the way this is NOT a new Firefox logo. It's just the fox mascot drawing that may be used in other parts of the UI like the welcome screen after a new install, or on social media.

The actual logo remains unchanged.

On top of that nowhere in the announcement are the supposed pronouns mentioned: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/meet-kit/

Actually the whole thing may be bullshit. Literally the only Mozilla reference I can find to Kit's pronouns is a statement given to like one or two blogs, and it says that any pronoun is acceptable.

Kit (he/she/they/them/it) is the user’s constant companion. Wherever they choose to roam, Kit will accompany and guide them with clever, playful encouragement and support — giving the user the confidence to run free.

That's attributed to Mozilla here: https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-has-killed-its-old-mascot-heres-what-the-new-cute-one-looks-like/

All other references seem to be chuds on X claiming that it's explicitly they/them and acting like Mozilla is making a big deal about that. As if it matters either way.

If you had some kind of reaction to this post you've fallen for culture war bullshit propaganda, congratulations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 14 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Solid sleuthing there. Edited the post to include your context.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    they do make explicit mention of non-gendered pronouns in their branding guidelines for kit. the intro blog post is an expression of those guidelines

    but every announcement by mozilla makes it clear that kit isn’t about taking a stance on gender: it’s simply explicitly about not taking a stance on gender

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Its to funny how whenever a Mozilla brand related thing happens its clarified that the firefox logo is not being changed. In no other context of a product receiving a new mascot would a clarification be needed that the logo is still the same.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Not on topic but sure do wonder why they silently pulled the Dino 2 years (I think?) prior and made the browser look boring. I guess it was apart of the master plan to shove a new mascot there and make media attention, + furry bait.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    The dino represents Mozilla, not Firefox itself. And yes, for a while, Mozilla didn't have the dino in its official branding, but it's now back in there. The flag is a dino head. As per usual, significantly more drama was made about them "removing" the dino than it was worth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    I meant that there was a different dino on the error pages in Firefox.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    but that was again not about removing the dino as much as as it was about differentiating mozilla from firefox by taking the mozilla identity from firefox because mozilla is more than firefox and behaves differently to firefox, and giving firefox its own identity which is more friendly

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 77 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Firefox is now exclusive to ternary computers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 31 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Isn't the old mascot/logo completely non-gendered already?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    There was nothing like that with the old fox-that-is-on-fire, so I guess mozilla is making a statement by pointing it out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
    • [–] 26 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    The old one was also non-binary. Prove me wrong.

    (Honestly, I just don't care. Load the web page and render some JavaScript already)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
    • [–] 20 points 7 months ago

    Maybe it’s meant to run on the old Soviet Setun platform.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 20 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    It's a fox. I like the fox.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Its actually a red panda iirc

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    Firefox is another name for the red panda, but the Firefox browser has always used foxes as logo/mascots. Before that it was called Phoenix, maybe that's why they decided to just use another fire-related animal name without thinking about it too much.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 19 points 7 months ago

    I never knew or thought about the old one's gender.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 37 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    Waterfox needs to catch up with a gender-fluid fox

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Librewolf also needs to come up with something.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Has anyone even thought about the gender of the original?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Non-binary PC is just a quantum computer innit?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Quantum computing yes, with qubits. But also tenery computing with trits, and probabilistic computing with p-bits. Analog computers probably fit in this category too.

    Probabilistic computing will probably become big before quantum computers, because it's a natural fit for probabilistic LLMs. Lots of work being done in this hardware field with photonics, neuromorphic and thermodynamic chips.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 16 points 7 months ago

    It uses qubits sorry. Get a quantum computer loser

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 13 points 7 months ago

    I have a friend IRL called Kit, who also happens to use they/them pronouns.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 29 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    That's stupid, it was genderless before until they brought it up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 20 points 7 months ago

    Are telling me they fired the previous mascot to hire a gender minority? Smh

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 52 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    What if.... hear me out.... what if we remove the focus on gender altogether? What if we stop engendering things that don't have genders? Like logos... and behavioral attributes...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    Since Mozilla actually didn’t and the post is based on a lie, I’ll say congratulations, your reaction is almost certainly what they were hoping for

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago* (6 children)

    You don't think people childishly over-anthropomorphize a lot these days? Cause I do, and that's what my comment was about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)

    I mean, if you can provide data which shows that anthropomorphisation - specifically the unwarranted attribution of gender to things which are genderless - is on the rise and can demonstrate, or even articulate what the real-world harm of this is, then maybe I will agree that ranting about it in response to a tweet from an anti-woke twitter user lying about it in order to stir up tired “culture war” arguments isn’t silly

    Perhaps we should also rant about the erosion of male-dominated spaces into spaces which are “lame and gay”, given that there are now women who play Warhammer?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

    Why would I have an issue with women playing warhammer?

    I'm explicitly saying that I think assigning things like warhammer (a genderless concept) as being for either men or women is stupid.

    The issue I have is everything being put into one of two categories that are essentially irrelevant.

    Gender is far less relevant than people make it; its emphasis is a long standing sociological trend that I hope can die as people feel more accepted and secure.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    Again, the question is can you demonstrate that this is actually something that is increasing?

    The relevance of the second tweet is that it’s from the same person. They’re trying to get an angry reaction from people to help fuel culture war bullshit. And you provided exactly the reaction they were after

    There ** was** no “focus on gender”. They just pretended there was so that people like you would amplify the signal. You fell for it without first stopping to check whether or not it was true

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    It's a mascot, not a logo. So it having a gender isn't strange.

    Also, since its pronouns are (quoting the announcement blog post) "he/him, they/them, she/her, and it" that is very open and not rather post-gender, in my opinion. The focus in the announcement is not on thee mascot's gender in fact.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Because it was what before? Why do we care about the gender identity of the fox mascot of a web browser?

    Don’t answer, please

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    we don’t care about the kits genders but mozilla cares about it being ambiguous because kit is a character meant to increase feelings of personal connection with the user by being able to be interpreted however the user likes (female, male, or non-binary)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    It's not just a binary. It's a BLOB!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    the four genders are 00, 01, 10, and 11.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    That's not even a full byte! Surely we can spare 6 more bits and support 255 genders.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Is 00 not a gender?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    gotta account for people who say "no" to "gender?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    Don’t tell the furries

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    all logos require genders

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    mascots gender says

    It's a fucking red panda.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Do they not have genders?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    That’s actually a pretty complex question. Are they even capable of conceptualizing their own internal model of themselves as it compares to their species’ gender norms?

    Since they’re not social species, I’d be very surprised if they could.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    likely yes. species in general are able to conceptualise gender because it’s necessary for procreation (keep reading; i promise this ends in a view that’s pro-trans but stronger because it’s harder to debate against)

    homosexual behaviour in animals among complex species line anthropoids is at minimum of ~10%, so even accounting for preference imo it’s pretty clear mammals are able to conceptualise gender, since gender is about roles specifically rather than sex and this 10% number is about exclusively homosexual sheep (apparently the number is 25% among black swans where the number includes homosexual pairing/parenting/etc instead of just sexual relationships)

    anyway, point being even among the most limited term animals tend to be able conceptualise gender

    but that’s not at all what the character of a mascot is about: a mascot is inherently an anthropic projection of human behaviour onto an animal (thus basically why furries exist and are pretty closely associated with mascots)

    imo firefox mascot can “somewhat legitimately” (and even perhaps “not uncharitably” - just ignorant maybe) be viewed either as less than 10% of animals displaying “transgender” behavour (ie the numbers displaying gendered behaviours that don’t match their sex - ignoring the concept of gender) and thus 10% of firefox mascots should be non-binary (yes i’m mixing those terms because remember this is the charitable but ignorant interpretation) and firefox doesn’t yet have 9 gendered mascots… or it can be viewed as 90% of mascots generally being gendered and thus a specifically non-gendered mascot in the “corpus of mascots” is warranted… but then it could be argued that actually the majority of mascots are non-gendered: perhaps not specifically, but implicitly simply because humans have grown to dislike misogyny and prefer female representation

    i’m saying this not because i necessarily agree with the reaction, but because it’s important to understand the alternative viewpoint regardless of agreement in concept. it’s at the very least more complex than the simple argument acknowledges

    imo representation is important, as we’ve pretty unambiguously agreed with female representation and even homosexual representation more broadly since about the 90s

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Where do y'all take info on pronouns?

    Haven't seen anything in the official announcement: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/meet-kit/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah I noticed that too.

    I found this quote supposedly attributed to Mozilla, as far as I can tell this is the whole issue, everything else is chuds on X running with it.

    Kit (he/she/they/them/it) is the user’s constant companion. Wherever they choose to roam, Kit will accompany and guide them with clever, playful encouragement and support — giving the user the confidence to run free.

    https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-has-killed-its-old-mascot-heres-what-the-new-cute-one-looks-like/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 6 points 7 months ago*

    does this mean nonbinary people foxes/red pandas have fire bending?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 10 points 7 months ago* (6 children)

    At risk of being abrasive...

    I see blue checkmarks, I downvote. Nothing personal. But I don't want to support that even indirectly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Good instinct. Pirat_Nation is a grifter/ragebaiting account. No one should be giving him visibility.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago*

    I mean, yeah... It's a blue checkmark account.

    At this point, if you're paying for extra engagement on Twitter, that is beyond "benefit of the doubt." It seems safe to assume its some kind of attention farm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago*

    It's not just corporations. It's influencer-grifters like Pirat_Nation.

    ...And, to be blunt, reposters who further spread the ragebait, like OP.

    The platforms, ultimately, are what facilitate "marketing bait." But I dunno what to do about that, as human being simply cannot help themselves once they see stuff like that. It works, apparently.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Interpreter based firefox script?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    This was an unnecessary addition to the culture war.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Okay, I know that this is supposed to be a riff, but that non-binary line is fucking hilarious.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    fuzzy foxy

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    It's ternary computing time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    load more comments
    view more: next ›
    35 comments in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev view that post