111–120 of 437 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there some way to ensure the donation money will actually go to Firefox and not to some sort of "diversity" campaign?
Yikes why would you not want companies investing in diversity? Especially if they are the interface to our online world?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Money is fungible. You could donate simply to keep them afloat regardless of their campaigns, in acknowledgement that the sum total of their activities is a massive positive that doesn't need nitpicking. Otherwise, you can recruit and hire someone to write the features you approve of.
If I give Mozilla more money than they were anticipating, will they put it aside for a rainy day? Or will they expand their ambitions to fit their new budget and find themselves impoverished again next year? Money is fungible but budgets have a nasty habit of being elastic.
https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2017/mozilla-fdn-201...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose if he wanted to donate to a diversity campaign, he'd donate to one directly. Wikipedia is a big one for this: the donation campaign is all about 'keeping our servers running', and then huge chunks of the spending goes on community feelgood stuff. I've nothing against diversity campaigning but if you were to treat donation like any other 'purchase' you'd be pretty miffed if you thought you were ordering a ch…
Orders and purchases are different from donations and gifts.
A lie is a lie whether it is related to a donation or a purchase.
Switched to Firefox a few months back. Havn’t missed Chrome at all
I work at Google, but use Firefox for all my private things... Except when I run into a page that's broken in Firefox. And except when I need developer tools. And except when I need the browser to translate sites for me. And except when I'm shopping, as Google does a good enough job with payment details. And except Google properties, because who knows what weird HTTP 3.7 will Chrome use to save some ocean boiling?
Or we can all go to Brave or even better to Tor.
I've set up a relay myself, so I guess I did my part... But I wish more people would see tor as a private browser, not a gateway to "drugs, CP, and extremism'"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Google has all these things because they have access to vastly more money and top tier developers than Mozilla. When you think about it, it's incredible that Firefox is as good as it is (same re Linux.) But obviously if Google wants to stay better than Firefox, whether it takes a year or a decade, they'll always be able to because they have an absurd amount of resources. So I wonder, what are Firefox's compet…
Ideology: as a tech person, I don't want the protocols to be defined by a single entity. Many Googlers agree, even if we also know this could result in faster progress. Less constraints: Firefox does not need to block release of a new feature because an Android API it depends on got blocked by legal due to regulations in Namibia. Organisational stability: Firefox has a good revenue stream and stable leadership, with…
I can't see how it could ever happen. No matter what they do they can't beat the developer and monetary resources of Google.
Those who want a world where Firefox has a higher market share and mind share, please consider doing the following: 1. Evangelize Firefox to people you know any chance you get and show them all the reasons why its better than Chrome (focus on privacy as an important point). Show them how great browsing can be with a few key extensions (like uBlock Origin, Containers, Privacy Possum, etc.). This does not imply that Mo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Those who want a world where Firefox has a higher market share and mind share I used to be one of these people but I am no longer. I have switched my default browser from Firefox to Brave since I cannot withstand Mozillas bullshit anymore. Not only is it a complete joke that firefox put Google Analytics on their privacy pages but their actions of "wokeness" in which they fired Brendan Eich and all their diversity s…
One of your points is that Mozilla is using Google Analytics on privacy pages so you switched to a browser powered by Google? Where will your donation go now if not to Mozilla?
Probably I will just save the money for now, but perhaps in the near future I will increase donations to some open source contributors via Open Collective (where I know it will fund the developers directly).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yikes why would you not want companies investing in diversity? Especially if they are the interface to our online world?
While wording could be improved, the point stands. I want my money to be used for working on Firefox (the core browser) and for that exclusively. Not something like Pocket or whatever Mozilla thinks it should bring out that nobody asked for. There is no way to ensure this, so I will not give any money at all.
Please keep in mind that this is not a personal attack as I don't know you and I don't find it particularly constructive to engage in this kind of attacks, so please only focus on my argument:
I cannot understand this way of thinking.
On one hand we have the option to give Mozilla some money to use them however they see fit.
This means that from the sum of the donations they can use whatever percentage they see fit to fund different products/aspects, e.g. the engineering department so that they can keep working on Firefox, the marketing department to increase the awareness and drive adoption, the user researchers to better understand their user needs etc.
On the other hand we have the "default" stance where we don't support what Mozilla is doing.
This means that the development of Firefox, the marketing to raise awareness etc, are depended on Google and on Pocket which is something that we want to get away from.
I think it mostly boils down to some simple questions and how we feel about the answers:
- Do I prefer to know that all my money go to hire more engineers and improve Firefox? Probably (tbh personally I would focus a bit more on user research, it's the everyday people that they should be after, not us)
- Do I prefer to allow Mozilla to be depended on Google? Definitely not.
- Can my donations be used to make the current situation worse (i.e. tie them tighter on Google's business)? No.
So for me, although I don't control where my money goes, I think that they can only be used to improve things.