11–20 of 1001 posts
Mozilla has a big leadership crisis. They kicked Brendan out because of woke politics and now they will pay the price. Get woke, go broke as they say.
Repeat after me: correlation is not causation.
Devils advocate: you have to pay a top exec more if the company looks like its main product is in decline. Plus 2.4m/year isn't crazy in the scheme of tech salaries - that exec could potentially take other roles that pay even more.
And they can't reduce their salary now because it'd be unfair on their families.
Firefox has a problem. It gets most of its revenue from Google. They need a different revenue stream but their ideas haven't worked.
Their executives are clearly failures. But with such high pay, they're cashing out. Buying themselves mansions etc.
Isn't that pretty much admitting that they're on a sinking ship?
Devils advocate: you have to pay a top exec more if the company looks like its main product is in decline. Plus 2.4m/year isn't crazy in the scheme of tech salaries - that exec could potentially take other roles that pay even more.
And is this strategy working?
Why is there no system for calling them out on this, swiftly kicking them out and staunching the bleeding?
I really want Mozilla to succeed. But I just can't bring myself to use Firefox as a daily driver. Just open a few tabs on a top of the line macbook, and a twitch stream and things get very laggy. I've seen numerous people craving for better container support, which is definitely a killer feature for people going forward towards a more private web. Why isn't Mozilla more actively developing this? Developers were the p…
What's wrong with the support it has? [1]
[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
The article notes the increase in pay and states > Mitchell Baker, Mozilla's top executive, was paid $2.4m in 2018 but doesn't offer any consideration or speculation as to why this is exaggerated. It's entirely possible that without that particular exec, Firefox would have been even worse off, or would have taken another direction with regards to privacy, etc. My subjective feeling is that $2.4m does indeed seem too…
Maybe a good CEO isn't defined just by the salary he or she receives?
Firefox OS has been pretty much unsuccessful, but it sort of made sense? It started to be made when Firefox was still on top on desktop, but mobile started eating its lunch; and it was clear that Firefox need to do something about it, or the future will be all Chrome and Safari, on the two locked-down platforms.
Which eventually happened, of course, and Firefox share is neglible nowadays on mobile.
The identity management with Persona or what was the name also made sense. People at that time started using Google and Facebook for unified identity, and it made sense to make a decentralized identity.
None of these project ultimately worked, but they made sense?
What never made sense to me was Pocket or Send, or even the teleconferencing they had, but it seems that Firefox doubles down on Pocket now.
Devils advocate: you have to pay a top exec more if the company looks like its main product is in decline. Plus 2.4m/year isn't crazy in the scheme of tech salaries - that exec could potentially take other roles that pay even more.
If he would do that, maybe better leadership would improve Mozillas situation.