this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
327 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

82329 readers
4371 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Wouldn’t that mean ten percent of all crashes in all apps would be caused by bit flips? What makes Firefox special?

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 53 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You can't effect the number of bit flips your users hardware has, but you can affect how often buggy code corrupts their memory or otherwise crashes your program.

Let's say any app will crash about once a year on my machine due to a bit flip. If the app is crap and crashes hundreds of times for other reasons, the bit flip is irrelevant. If the app is robust enough that the bit flip accounts for 10 % of the crashes, that basically means the app is pretty much never crashing due to poor code.

[–] MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's the way people should be looking at it. It basically means hard crashes are extremely rare in the firefox ecosystem.

To be fair, I can't remember the last time a browser crashed on me in general.

[–] caschb@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

I’ve had Safari of all things crash on me a couple of times. Still, not enough to actually be disruptive.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 17 points 1 day ago

Anecdotal evidence, but I had both a 13th gen and 14th gen Intel CPU with the bug that caused them to over time, destroy themselves internally.

The most-user-visible way this initially came up, before the CPUs had degraded too far, was Firefox starting to crash, to the point that I initially used Firefox hitting some websites as my test case when I started the (painful) task of trying to diagnose the problem. I suspect that it's because Firefox touches a lot of memory, and is (normally) fairly stable


a lot of people might not be too surprised if some random game crashes.

[–] Kairus@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

You're assuming that app quality is constant. But if I made an app that crashes on launch, I can confidently say 0% of those crashes would be from bitflips.

Firefox isn't special in some way that could cause bitflips, but it's 1) where this data was collected (and why this post isnt talking about some other product) and 2) speaks to the quality of FF, because crashes are rare enough for bit flips to be a significant crash factor.

The takeaway is that for the FF team, and anyone using ram (everyone), bitflips are more common than expected

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

As a long time Firefox user, I believe Firefox sees orders of magnitude more RAM issues than other apps because it is using orders of magnitude more RAM than other apps.

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 5 points 20 hours ago

I suspect the stuff Firefox stores in ram is more sensitive, too. A lot of games load tens of gigabytes of textures, but a bitflip in that stuff will lead to a pixel somewhere being the wrong colour instead of a crash.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 19 hours ago

You Firefox also hoards RAM? I thought it's just mine.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, they're saying Firefox uses so much ram they're far far more likely to be a victim!

[–] grue@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

Laughs in Memory: 46.84 GiB / 62.72 GiB (75%) with (probably) several hundred tabs open

[–] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It would be interesting to see how this works in Chrome. I would guess that it could be the same - people tend to leave their browsers open with hundreds of tabs and will never reboot their laptops. If you play a random game for 2 hours, bit flips shouldn't be a problem. But if you keep your browser open for weeks or months with hundreds of tabs, that may cause problems.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

... I can't imagine having a browser with hundreds of open tabs. That would tend me of the old days of Netscape Navigator and all the popups and browser add on cancer.

Ahh the nostalgic days of the early Dotcom era. I sometimes miss you geocities