821–830 of 970 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It will evolve into a modern AI browser OMG, please, no! What are they thinking and who wants an "AI browser"? > Are there any true alternatives Firefox with blocked updates works pretty well.
Not updating works until an exploit fixed years ago exfiltrates your bank info
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe that has to do with Brave not getting a free check to the tune iof $500M Google every year. That makes it more difficult to create "free internet" type projects.
Probably comes from the Crypto scam integrated into the browser. I find it funny some people shit on Firefox for adding Pocket, but defend Brave for adding crypto scams to the browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably comes from the Crypto scam integrated into the browser. I find it funny some people shit on Firefox for adding Pocket, but defend Brave for adding crypto scams to the browser.
I don't defend Brave adding this feature or believe that it is even a good idea but how does this constitute a scam?
Maybe not, but you spend quite some time spitting on Mozilla for taking money from Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fully agree with this. - Mozilla SSL Certs - for corporations that don't want Let's Encrypt - Mozilla Mail - a reliable Exchange/Google Mail alternative (desperately needed imo) - Thunderbird for iOS - why is this not a thing yet? - Mozilla Search - metasearch that isn't based on Bing/DDG/Google - Mozilla HTTPS DNS - although Cloudflare will probably always do this better All seemingly low-hanging fruit with brand al…
Quant and Ecosia are already building their own (European) index in a joint venture. Mozilla Search is totally uninteresting (to me).
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…
Fully agree with this. - Mozilla SSL Certs - for corporations that don't want Let's Encrypt - Mozilla Mail - a reliable Exchange/Google Mail alternative (desperately needed imo) - Thunderbird for iOS - why is this not a thing yet? - Mozilla Search - metasearch that isn't based on Bing/DDG/Google - Mozilla HTTPS DNS - although Cloudflare will probably always do this better All seemingly low-hanging fruit with brand al…
Genuinely interested: are you a developer? Doesn't sound like low-hanging fruit to me.
There are already many alternatives to Gmail, I don't think Mozilla would make a lot of money there. And I don't know if they are making a lot of money with their Mozilla VPN (which I understand is a wrapper around Mullvad): why would I pay Mozilla instead of Mullvad?
There are alternative search engines, like Kagi in the US and Qwant/Ecosia in Europe (though only Qwant seems to keep the servers in Europe).
What I want from Mozilla, really, is a browser. And I would love to donate to that specifically, but I don't think I can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody wants this. People want firefox.
That's like saying, "Nobody wants Adwords; people want Chrome." True but besides the point. Salaries have to be paid somehow. Some options I can think of for paying salaries: - Go the Wikipedia route, stay entirely free, and beg for donations on a regular basis - Start charging for Firefox; or for Firefox Premium - Use Firefox as a loss-leader to build a brand, and use that brand to sell other products (which is esse…
Bad comparison, but I understand your point.
> Salaries have to be paid somehow.
I would be interested in knowing how much of what Mozilla does brings money. Isn't it almost exclusively the Google contract with Firefox?
As a non-profit, Mozilla does not seem to be succeeding with Firefox. Mozilla does a lot of other things (I think?) but I can't name one off the top of my head. Is Google paying for all of that, or are the non-Firefox projects succeeding? Like would they survive if Firefox was branched off of Mozilla?
And then would enough people ever contribute to Firefox if it stopped getting life support from Google? Not clear either.
It's a difficult situation: I use Firefox but I regularly have to visit a website on Chrom(ium) because it only works there. It doesn't sound right that Google owns the web and Firefox runs behind, but if Chrome was split from Google, would it be profitable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't effectively paywall it because not only is it open source, but there are many nearly equivalent competitors all of which are free. Any subscribers would essentially be donors. There are people like yourself who would be happy to donate, but not nearly enough. Replacing MoCo's current revenue with donors would require donations at the level of Doctors without Borders, American Cancer Society, or the Make-a-W…
Oh no, it would be a donation and it's not going to completely replace all the funding of the parent entity of the project mentioned, therefore it's not realistic or worth trying. Right... That's a lot of arguments unrelated to what I wrote.
What I understand they are saying is that donations wouldn't be nearly enough. Which is related to what you wrote, which is that you would gladly donate to Firefox (not Mozilla, but Firefox).
They compared it to the largest non-profits in America, presumably because if we look at the money spent by Mozilla every year, that's similar. Right now Google pays for Mozilla, and if you wanted to replace that with donations, it would have to become one of the biggest charities in America. Which does not sound plausible.
If I understood correctly, I'm not the OP :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't effectively paywall it because not only is it open source, but there are many nearly equivalent competitors all of which are free. Any subscribers would essentially be donors. There are people like yourself who would be happy to donate, but not nearly enough. Replacing MoCo's current revenue with donors would require donations at the level of Doctors without Borders, American Cancer Society, or the Make-a-W…
> You can't effectively paywall it because not only is it open source, but there are many nearly equivalent competitors all of which are free. You're forgetting that people will buy a product on brand identity alone. If the Firefox brand is solid enough, those forks won't matter.
I think the argument makes sense, to be honest.