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

Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

support.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 721 posts

Re: Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

#551

Post by denton-scratch »

mblock wrote: post #456
samizdis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I really, really, really dislike the language they have used lately. That is exactly the problem I have with it - weasel words and euphemisms; FF is scoring an own-goal here and eroding trust. Why not just tell it like it is. "We need funding and are lining up deals with third parties to display their ads/messaging in the address bar search. We vet these third parties by holding them contractually to these standard…

Why are we shocked about marketing?

Who is this "we"? Are you shocked?

Speaking for myself, I'm not shocked, nor even surprised, that marketers would like to get into my living-room and my bedroom. If Mozilla wants to facilitate that, then they become my enemy.

Marketers are going to do marketing, just as pigs roll in shit and rabbits breed. I'm not trying to stop the tide; but I'll sandbag my front-door, so the tide doesn't wash into my home. If Mozilla wants to try an end-run around my flood defences, Mozilla can be removed quite easily.

Mozilla execs seem increasingly the same as the execs at IANA. They don't have real customers or shareholders; they are not held to account. It astonishes me how much these greedy oafs get paid. They are removing value, not adding it.

Re: Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

#552

Post by deepbreath »

unbalancedevh wrote: post #538
deepbreath wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it's not used correctly here. "A iff B" means "A implies B and B implies A". "I'd be willing to entertain, or even support, this way of them making money iff they spelled out honestly what they're doing and why" implies both of these: - "If they spelled out honestly what they're doing and why, I'd be willing to entertain [...]" - "If I'd be willing to entertain [..] then they will honestly spell what they're d…

A iff B doesn't mean that B is because of A. It simply means that if A is true then B must be as well. > - "If I'd be willing to entertain [..] then they will honestly spell what they're doing and why". This is true, because if they won't, then you wouldn't be willing to entertain [..]

You're right, I guess it depends on what you choose A and B to be. For:

A = OP supports Mozilla making money from address bar ads

B = Mozilla is honest about making money from address bar ads

"B -> A" (OP supports Mozilla if Mozilla acts a certain way) makes sense. "A -> B" sounds confusing in a sentence, but its contrapositive, "!B -> !A", also makes sense.

However, for:

B = Mozilla decides to make money from address bar ads and is honest about reasons

"A -> B" no longer makes sense, since OP can support Mozilla having the address bar ads with an honest justification, but Mozilla can still decide to not have the address bar ads.

Re: Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

#553

Post by chobytes »

Mozilla has been a shambling corpse for awhile, and theyre dragging whats left of firefox with them. Their only goal is to line administrators pockets as much as possible before the end. To that end theyll use up whatever good will and trust they have left.

Personally Ive been done with them since that incident a fee years ago where they were silently pushing out some adware extension for some movie. That followed by their explanation and non-apology told me they were already dead.

Re: Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

#557

Post by jamienicol »

ravenstine wrote: post #275
Adrig wrote: post #34

Meh, the feature is easily deactivable, the settings are clear and extensive. As far as ads go, it's one of the best implementations. Firefox still has no alternative in the privacy / user-centric space (don't mention Brave, I'm gonna get mad). Mozilla has done a lot for the web, I can give them some slack for exploring different revenue models. Still, I'm going to keep on eye for this kind of practices in the future…

How many things are we going to need to deactivate in 5 years from now? First Pocket, then this; what next? Thanks a lot for mismanaging your budget like seemingly every other non-profit, Mozilla.

What's wrong with pocket?

Re: Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

#558

Post by dblohm7 »

zh3 wrote: post #140
dmitrij wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me pay for Firefox, please!

There's always Palemoon [0] (for anyone who likes the classic firefox interface). I've been using it for years (and have donated), plus I like the fact it can be installed just by unpacking a tarball/zip file (as well as the more usual methods). [0] http://www.palemoon.org/

Palemoon, the same guys who mock sandboxing and multiprocess browsing?

No thanks.

Re: Mozilla to put ads in Firefox address bar suggestions

#559

Post by stickfigure »

y4mi wrote: post #370
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source showing the vast majority of revenue goes to leadership? In 2018, the CEO’s salary equaled 0.64% of revenue. Before we discuss whether that is right or wrong, we should at least agree on a set of facts. https://itdm.com/mozilla-firefox-usage-down-85-but-why-are-e...

they generally get more then 400 million yearly revenue, though there was one outlier with over 800 million. this is money they generally don't have to pay taxes on because of their status as a non-profit. mozilla employs at the moment around 800 people. according to their FAQ > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2015/f... > More than 75% of Mozilla spending is on people-related investments to prod…

> this is money they generally don't have to pay taxes on because of their status as a non-profit.

Minor nit here - they don't have to pay taxes because they don't make a profit, not because of their status. If a for-profit corporation doesn't make profit (and few tech companies do), they won't have to pay income taxes either.

$375k per employee for a pure technology company doesn't seem outrageous? That has to include facilities too.

It's hard not to read into your message the suggestion that you'd like Mozilla to outsource development to lower-wage countries. I really doubt that's going to succeed in a challenging and competitive market like browsers. IMO they'd be better off spending more trying to poach the best brains behind Chrome.

Post reply on HN