Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla lays off 70

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 962 posts

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#831

Post by multiplegeorges »

pier25 wrote: post #520
multiplegeorges wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found a UX quirk that bothered me. I documented it, proposed a solution with my own justifications for why it would be better, and submitted a bug report. Feedback from Moz, the work done on it, the patches created, and the release plan for it were all done in the open and I could track it. The change I suggested was implemented and is now out. Be the change you want to see... only Firefox/Mozilla would do this in…

> Opened 19 years ago https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69687

Sure, no process is perfect. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

The multilingual thing sounds like a big problem for people that rely on that.

My comment was directed to your other complaints about UX quirks.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#832

Post by solarengineer »

I diligently donate to Mozilla, Wikimedia, and openbsd. After reading about executives and their largesse on various threads today, I do want to know: do donations to the Mozilla Foundation go towards paying the salaries and various expenses of the executives at Mozilla the corporate?

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#833

Post by modo_mario »

fock wrote: post #432
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> politics (e. g. “safe-sync”) I’m continually impressed by what people are willing to label “politics”. And by how badly people must hate whatever they understand “politics” to be.

well, it's not directly related to browser/app development (which is still the purpose of the non-profit Mozilla foundation???), but instead it's all part of the rebranding of Mozilla as a consumer SaaS-company which is currently taking place. And there is no cause for that, except politics around the internet together with an influx of people who are trying to do their marketing shitshow the righteous way this time.…

>well, it's not directly related to browser/app development (which is still the purpose of the non-profit Mozilla foundation???)

"The Mozilla community uses, develops, spreads and supports Mozilla products, thereby promoting exclusively free software and open standards, with only minor exceptions"

Making a browser was part of supporting FOSS and open web standards.

>but instead it's all part of the rebranding of Mozilla as a consumer SaaS-company which is currently taking place. And there is no cause for that, except politics around the internet together with an influx of people who are trying to do their marketing shitshow the righteous way this time. Integrating pocket was basically the idea of the CIO?

Whilst I agree that the implementation was horrendous the idea behind it was good. Do you know what I love? I can bookmark something and have that bookmark available at home. I can log in somewhere and quickly do it elsewhere. That's firefox sync. Nobody complains about it because it isn't noticed as such a service.

The main dominator of the web currently is Google's chrome. It goes beyond even that. A lot of chrome's convenience and incentive for use for people comes from providing an ecosystem. Keep, calendar and the like and despite how terrible the limited functionality for addons is they all nicely integrate with the browser by defaault and their mobile versions everyone gets on android. Tried an addon for keep on firefox? It's trash. There's no convenient alternatives and without pushing them they won't appear.

Additionally they're entirely dependent on funding from their competitor who pushes the monopolising of webstandards and implementation that they try to combat.

>facebook is evil, everyone knows. but the foundation needlessly transforming into the same type of service business is ok, you know. they are doing it for good!

The fuck are you on about. moz literally implemented facebook containers to keep the tracking out and their defined data privacy principles can be trusted. Facebook isn't even a consumer or product focused service business (with some exceptions of course) they're generally in it for your data for advertising purposes given that you don't give em a dime for the privilege of using their social media.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#834

Post by modo_mario »

pastor_elm wrote: post #293
throwaway123x2 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy how much FF's marketshare has dropped. It's such a great browser.

Firefox Focus too.

Isn't that a very low maintenance thing? Generally just a light and very speedy stripped down version of the browser with simple security/privacy changes that aren't in the main one because they'd be inconvenient for people.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#835

Post by intarga »

wyoh wrote: post #821
intarga wrote: post #781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the context, I take ideological diversity to mean inclusion of people who are sexist, homophobic, and transphobic. The identity characteristic here revolves around the exclusion of others, how in any sense does that make it reasonable to include them in the name of diversity? You're asking people to tolerate intolerance in the name of tolerance. I can't see such a request as anything less than insincere.

You're part of the problem by thinking anyone with differing opinions is sexist racist transphobic and any other ism.

We're not talking about "anyone with differing opinions", we're talking about a specific person who publicly denounced their coworkers based on their gender and sexuality.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#836

Post by modo_mario »

pnako wrote: post #644
musicale wrote: post #296

> “You may recall that we expected to be earning revenue in 2019 and 2020 from new subscription products as well as higher revenue from sources outside of search. This did not happen I don't want subscription garbage, and I don't want Firefox advertising stuff to me. However, I have no idea how I'd try to fund Mozilla when most of their work is on a product that they give away for free. I can't imagine that grants fr…

Why not something like the Linux Foundation? Stop all the marketing and the nonsense advocacy, focus on developing a browser, get other companies to fund development. It's in the interest of quite a few vendors to have a good, neutral browser.

The linux foundation gets money because quite a lot of products, companies depend on it. Their servers, their iot devices, etc, etc A lot of the code contributions come from the industries that depend on it not just volunteers or people payed with donations by small time linux lovers.

Nobody directly depends on Mozilla and or features in their product and so nobody will give them money because of that. (you can argue rust trough kubernetes and such is an example of the opposite but despite their big influence and contribution it's not really a mozilla product) Electron has chromium at it's core, CEF apps have chromium at their core, all the other popular alternatives have chromium at their core and google has nice control. Despite that this dominance is ultimately bad for everyone. Google gets too much control over internet standards and their implementation. It is trash. and Mozzila depends on them too for their funding.

I'd say we even risk that they wouldn't get hit with monopoly rulings if Mozilla and firefox dies despite their competition being utterly dependant on and at the mercy of the direction of their product.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#837

Post by overcast »

manfredo wrote: post #566
overcast wrote: post #540

Only in fairy tale land does CEO/Executive compensation reflect performance.

Many CEOs derive a significant portion - often even the majority - of their compensation from performance-based bonuses. Compensation not only reflects performance, it is directly tied to it.

Millions/Billions were paid out in bailout money, to the very same people responsible for collapsing the housing market in 2009. Compensation for that level is complete bullshit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/business/31pay.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/16b-of-bank-bailout-went-to-exe...

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/banks-paid...

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#838

Post by modo_mario »

core-questions wrote: post #471
Polylactic_acid wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its exactly the same as avoiding a company which uses slave labor in some 3rd world countries. No one wants to be funding these actions.

You're seriously likening the inability of gay people to go through the motions of a marriage ceremony to children being subjected to slave labour? That's the falsest equivocation I have ever read.

>You're seriously likening the inability of gay people to go through the motions of a marriage ceremony to children being subjected to slave labour? That's the falsest equivocation I have ever read.

I'm not too familiar with the US and it's laws but doesn't marriage have an impact on legal matters, benefits and taxation? I know for example that here I can't get a higher loan based on a higher percentage of my income because i'm single and the bank is limited in how it can lend out the money it lends from a state entity.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#839

Post by modo_mario »

core-questions wrote: post #351
cdmckay wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn’t not support gay marriage, he actively gave money to oppose it. That’s a little different.

It doesn't matter - it's legal, protected political speech in donation form. There's nothing wrong with having differing opinions about things; you can disagree as much as you like and donate as much as you want to counter it.

Here's an equally correct example invoking Godwin's law.

>Why yes I do donate lots to the ANP. >Why? Well they align with my love for Hitler, racial purity and fascism. >What do you mean the board things this'll make jewish employees uncomfortable? >A wider range of customers/employees won't like it either? >So what. It's legal, protected political speech in donation form!

Nobody gives a fuck. It's equally legal to not want to associate with such a person. Whether it's a racist or someone that wants to ban gay marriage, etc i wouldn't to work for them, with them or fund them. And guess what. I don't expect the Mormon church or whatever to put part of a gay couple or an advocate or donor for related stuff in an executive position either.

Re: Mozilla lays off 70

#840

Post by bjl »

BrendanEich wrote: post #733
m3adow wrote: post #713

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still 100% depending on Google, still supporting a near monopolistic position for the browser. Every Chromium fork is part of the problem, not the solution.

Engine consolidation happened, the fight now is over privacy. When and if Brave is big enough we will chart our own engine course.

It seems a bit rich to claim that Brave cares about privacy when just one year ago they were spoofing identities to commit charity fraud.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999

Post reply on HN