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

Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 970 posts

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#611

Post by autoexec »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #557
glenstein wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>sock the google money into an endowment before it runs out. They did that! Why are people proposing that like it's a new idea?

If they were on a sustainable trajectory they wouldn't be selling their soul for advertising money and other ill-advised revenue projects that contradict their stated mission.

They could be on a sustainable trajectory and still sell their soul purely out of greed. I'm not suggesting that Mozilla is actually doing that, I just wanted to point out the possibility.

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#612

Post by dabockster »

Yoric wrote: post #552
gkoberger wrote: post #275

Having worked at Mozilla a while ago, the CEO role is one I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. Success is oddly defined: it's a non-profit (well, a for-profit owned by a non-profit) that needs to make a big profit in a short amount of time. And anything done to make that profit will annoy the community. I hope Anthony leans into what makes Mozilla special. The past few years, Mozilla's business model has been to just m…

FWIW, I remember when Mozilla started experimenting with AI, and that was way ahead of the curve (around 2015, iirc?) But yeah, I agree that buying a great email provider would be a very interesting step. And perhaps partnering with Matrix.

They need to give Thunderbird more resources first.

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#613

Post by lukewrites »

alberth wrote: post #25

Dumb question: who’s Firefox target user? Chrome is able to capture the mass consumer market, due to Google’s dark pattern to nag you to install Chrome anytime you’re on a Google property. Edge target enterprise Fortune 500 user, who is required to use Microsoft/Office 365 at work (and its deep security permission ties to SharePoint). Safari has Mac/iOS audience via being the default on those platform (and deep platf…

Somehow its target user group includes my father, who is 90 years old. As far as I can recall, we got him using Firefox years ago and he became a committed user.

I wish more browsers would target seniors. Accessibility and usability is universally a nightmare.

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#614

Post by [deleted] »

gkoberger wrote: post #422
macspoofing wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What Mozilla is good at ... Firefox - the one thing they do not want to work on is the only thing that makes them special.

They do work on it. A lot. But the issue is browsers don't make money. You can't charge for it, you can't add ads to it, etc. You're competing with the biggest companies in the world (Google, Apple), all of whom are happy to subsidize a browser for other reasons.

[deleted]

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#615

Post by wtallis »

jrflowers wrote: post #597
wtallis wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They literally forced every user to either accept the invasion of the proprietary service, or have to take extra steps to disable it on each of their devices. Neither of those is actually a reasonable, respectful way to treat your users.

I just never used Pocket. I don’t think I had to change my habits or settings to do so.

Sure, living with the nuisance of the advertising and UI clutter is an option, as I said. But the fact that they were relatively minor nuisances compared to eg. Windows 11's BS doesn't change the fact that they were still unwelcome and unnecessary and disrespectful.

I don't think there's anything radical about my stance that a new toolbar button showing up—with advertising calling attention to it—integrating a proprietary service into my open-source browser is inappropriate behavior on Mozilla's part.

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#616

Post by belorn »

array_key_first wrote: post #539
wvh wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still sad they shelved Mozilla Persona due to low adoption. There is a hole in the market around privacy and identity, and Mozilla would be a natural choice to fill it, but it's going to be an uphill battle to get major sites and end users on board. Not a job to be envious about indeed.

[flagged]

I must have seen other sides of the community, since all I seen has been a consistent criticism that Mozilla neglects the two main products Firefox and Thunderbird, while focusing community money and focus on new products that does nothing to improve Firefox and Thunderbird. When new products get released it is indeed met with extreme scorn, and when they eventually fail, they will anew get criticized for wasting money.

There is a market share costs that pocket had on Firefox. Lost developer time, money and community trust mean that product pushed Firefox just that bit further into marginalization. Basically every product Mozilla releases is the same story when they fail to make their core product better.

It is not damned if you do, damned if you don't. Google could abandon Chrome, gmail or any other product like that and they would still be Google (and be profitable). Mozilla would not exist without Firefox, and the trust the community has with Mozilla is directly tied with Firefox.

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#618

Post by dabockster »

tigroferoce wrote: post #595
gkoberger wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do work on it. A lot. But the issue is browsers don't make money. You can't charge for it, you can't add ads to it, etc. You're competing with the biggest companies in the world (Google, Apple), all of whom are happy to subsidize a browser for other reasons.

You can and you should. There are people that are happy to pay for email, for search, for videos, for news, for music. I don't see why there wouldn't be people happy to pay for a browser. The idea that software is free is completely wrong and should be something that an organization like Mozilla should combat. If software is free, there can be no privacy, it's as simple as that.

> The idea that software is free is completely wrong

> If software is free, there can be no privacy, it's as simple as that.

Strongly agreed. Free software, either $0 or through stronger licenses like the GPL, have their economics completely shifted as an unintended side effect. Those new economics tend to favor clandestine funding sources (eg ads or malicious supply chain code).

But sustainable funding honestly isn't Mozilla's strong suite (or tech's in general, for that matter).

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#619

Post by autoexec »

flerchin wrote: post #554
the_biot wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming Mozilla would be successful at a privacy play because they are a trusted organization. I can't stress this enough: they are not.

A privacy play would be more successful from Mozilla if I were paying them for it. The incentives would be aligned. I cannot pay google for privacy, because they are incentivized against that.

Paying a company for something doesn't mean that the company isn't going to also sell every scrap of your data they can get their hands on. If the company is unethical you are always going to be the product. Mozilla is either going to be an ethical company or it isn't and how much money you give them won't make any difference. Mozilla has not always been an ethical company, but I don't think it's too late for them to turn that around, even if it will take time for trust to be rebuilt. I still want them to be the hero we need them to be.

Re: Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

#620

Post by kbelder »

RobotToaster wrote: post #448
ceejayoz wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point is that if you were to apply the "you get fired from your job for this" standard evenly, the majority of the country would've had to get fired from their jobs. Standards should be higher for folks with more power. The cashier at the grocery store expressing bigoted beliefs won't harm me much; my boss doing it is more serious. > Nobody was being murdered here, it's not remotely the same. I assure you, homo…

> Standards should be higher for folks with more power. Joe Biden voted for the "Defense of Marriage Act", Yet many LGBT people supported him becoming president.

Obama opposed gay marriage as well. As did many prominent politicians, left and right.

The swing from opposing it to supporting it was a huge cultural shift, and I'm not sure I've seen anything like that happen so quickly, except maybe during a time of war. It went from being opposed by a strong majority to supported by a strong majority in... maybe 5-8 years? It was pretty impressive, and I think it's a sign that the marketplace of ideas can still function.

It helps a lot that it's really a harmless thing. It's giving people more freedom, not taking any away from anyone, and so as soon as it became clear that it wasn't causing a problem, everybody shrugged and went 'ok'.

Post reply on HN