851–860 of 1001 posts
Year Total 2010 $123 million 2011 $164 million 2012 $311 million 2013 $314 million 2014 $420 million 2015 $420 million 2016 $520 million 2017 $562 million 2018 $436 million https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
This: "Mitchell Baker, Mozilla's top executive, was paid $2.4m in 2018, [..]. Payments to Baker have more than doubled in the last five years." and this at the same time: "Mozilla recently announced that they would be dismissing 250 people." It's shameful. Specially for a "non profit".
You could save a lot of jobs by cutting into the CEOs salary, jobs of people who actually do something productive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was the CEO for 11 days, I don't think we can say he was a great CEO of Mozilla.
For context: > Brendan Eich is [the] creator of the JavaScript programming language. He co-founded the Mozilla project, the Mozilla Foundation and the Mozilla Corporation, and served as the Mozilla Corporation's chief technical officer and briefly, as its chief executive officer. [1] Yes he was only CEO for 11 days, but he literally co-founded Mozilla so it's not like he was only around for a couple weeks. [1] https:…
What amazes me most is that tech-savvy people still use Google Chrome, which is basically spyware. That pay is abhorrent for a company that failed to communicate the mission, even though the browser is better than ever.
Same with Windows. : D
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly do not understand. He said his personal opinions are not going to affect his decisions. And I'm sure he can believe in whatever he wants - in Christ, Flat Earth and Aliens if he wants. As outsider it looks like in recent years the most vocal shaming is not of gay or fat but shaming of whoever does not participate in shaming. I really hope that these are not true representatives of LGBT community.
> I honestly do not understand. He said his personal opinions are not going to affect his decisions. Words are cheap, I don't think it's at all unreasonable to think that some employees might not feel that way or trust him to back up those words with real actions. > And I'm sure he can believe in whatever he wants - in Christ, Flat Earth and Aliens if he wants. They sure can and I can choose who I work for. If someon…
Why don't they speak last years? Do they support how CEO manages company? If not should we believe employees had any say than?
> even though I'm not religious
That's the problem, I'd expect if you was the president these prayers would not have a word. Minority who does not understand other minorities.
> You are describing it as if people were mad at other people for not calling Eich out
No, I am describing people who said not a world of love. Who see only their stance and force it on other people. I by comparison do not care - that's neutral. I am against propaganda and hate speech.
I am convinced that the recent "news" against Mozilla's org are nothing more than a smear campaign from Google to destroy the relatively recent renewed support for Firefox against Chrome. Firefox is an alternative to Chrome, and I don't care how much the CEO is making, as long as I can get rid of Chrome in my computer.
Web-browser is not very profitable bussines, and by bloating web with more and more complexity, we made sure maintaining alternative implementations is getting harder and more costly.
The Web degenerated into it's natural conclusion - a centralized platform controlled by a handful of corporations extracting value from its users.
Seriously, better start exploring alternatives already if you care about your privacy and freedom, because this route is gone.
Isn't the obvious answer that CEO/executive pay should be tied more closely to performance? I don't root for anyone to lose their job, but in this case, it seems like the leadership of Mozilla is failing to lead them in the right direction. I don't see how that gets rewarded. If my performance metrics at work go down 85% - I'm probably getting fired. In this case, executive performance metrics should be closely tied…
> Isn't the obvious answer that CEO/executive pay should be tied more closely to performance? Short term or long term? How do you measure performance in a way that can't be gamed? How do you prevent alignment of the company to achieve the metrics you set at the expense of all of the other things that make a thriving corporation?
Sure setting good metrics is hard, but that doesn't mean you should not set and publish metrics.
What seemed to have happened is that pay was simply increased without strings. There are a bunch of cultural outcomes then across the company when you have this kind of absurdity.
(A previous company I worked for the CEO had a multi-million dollar loan for his family-home/mansion written off by the company/board... the company was losing money.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think you'll be able to attribute that quote to me. Eich fucked up, and should have realized that you can't be leading a flagship of diversity on the one hand and be a bigot on the other. I have a problem with characterizing Brendan Eich as a bigot for donating to a non-fringe political group. IIRC, the proposition campaign he donated to had close to a 50/50 split in support for/against. Eich's ouster cryst…
I'm still a FF evangelist though it is getting harder by the day. Eich should have realized that his actions as CEO of a highly visible entity would be viewed in a different light than if he were merely just another nobody. Missing that was his crucial mistake, he could have made the donation anonymously, but decided to do it in his own name making it a given that this would be associated with Mozilla. That was stupi…
Apologize for what? Exercising his right to political speech? His views represented the views of 52% of the Californian voters, i.e. the majority of voters. He's supposed to apologize for, literally, "agreeing with most people?"
If employees were revolting, perhaps him stepping down was the right choice. But suggesting that he should "apologize" for having political views some employees disagree with is completely unreasonable and indicative of a bullying power play.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that we have the person who arguably most understands the domain of web browsers, online privacy, and all the legal and ethical aspect thereof, working on another Chromium-based browser. I do not need to elaborate on why a diverse browser ecosystem is important, there are enough threads on that already. Mozilla had this jewel, exactly what it needed to succeed and make the web a better place. He was at…
Sorry, but you're not going to paint Eich as a victim over what is a totally self inflicted wound. And there is no argument from utility to be made here either along the lines of 'oh Eich may be a bigot, but look at that nice browser he gave us'. He has to work with the people around him and that scenario would have likely not panned out. Instead, a large chunk of Mozilla/FireFox' employees may have walked if he had…
Or it would, since he worked with the same people before the wokefest with absolutely zero complaints from anybody. If people didn't decide having ideological purity and expelling wrongthink is more important than having a good independent browser. Well, they have their purity now. Hope they are happy. Their usage may be in the drain and their perspectives bleak, but at least nobody dares to form an unapproved opinion!
> Instead, a large chunk of Mozilla/FireFox' employees may have walked if he had tried to hang on
Or, somebody adult would explain to them it's actually ok to disagree on some subject, and that't the thing adults do sometimes. Unfortunately, looks like there's no adults in the industry anymore. Or at least not at those quarters.