Live data from Hacker News

Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

brendaneich.com

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#21
post #15
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Their transition from an open source project to an organization receiving millions from the Google search box." You can be both things. Generally it's nice to be paid for your work. "The restrictions (based on security reasons) to install an extension from a site different than mozilla addons" If someone convinces you to install a malicious browser extension (easily done in a world where people will click OK on basi…

> If someone convinces you to install a malicious browser extension (easily done in a world where people will click OK on basically anything) they can spy on and control everything you do online. Do you think then that for example desktop software must be installed from a central company like Microsoft because someone can convince you to install it from every website? And also: do you think that Mozilla was really do…

You can install extensions from any site. You'll only get an additional prompt if you're not installing from the mozilla add-on site.

You can think it was about control, but this could not be farther from truth.

I work for mozilla

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#22
post #17

As Peter Norvig argued, design patterns are bug reports against your programming language. Does anybody know what the actual quote is? I love this.

There was a link: http://www.norvig.com/design-patterns/

I think you are looking for an exact quote but the link is to slides of a talk :(

I also agree with the sentiment, but you Architecture Astronaut will no doubt disagree.

You really can't just take a design pattern and apply it blindly across languages. I spend far too much of my time on a C# application where I have to deconstruct anti-patterns and make them more amenable to change.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#23
post #22
post #17

As Peter Norvig argued, design patterns are bug reports against your programming language. Does anybody know what the actual quote is? I love this.

There was a link: http://www.norvig.com/design-patterns/ I think you are looking for an exact quote but the link is to slides of a talk :( I also agree with the sentiment, but you Architecture Astronaut will no doubt disagree. You really can't just take a design pattern and apply it blindly across languages. I spend far too much of my time on a C# application where I have to deconstruct anti-patterns and make them mo…

Yeah, I've shared that sentiment for a while now, but it was the turn of phrase that pulled me in, and I wanted to know whether to attribute it to Peter or Brendan.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#24
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If someone convinces you to install a malicious browser extension (easily done in a world where people will click OK on basically anything) they can spy on and control everything you do online. Do you think then that for example desktop software must be installed from a central company like Microsoft because someone can convince you to install it from every website? And also: do you think that Mozilla was really do…

You can install extensions from any site. You'll only get an additional prompt if you're not installing from the mozilla add-on site. You can think it was about control, but this could not be farther from truth. I work for mozilla

An additional prompt means less conversions.

There are alternative methods that Mozilla could do, like bringing a Mozilla certificate to host the extension in your own site without an extra prompt.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#25
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't compare Google Research against Mozilla Research. Google is really moving computer science forward, just look at their papers and real implementations (disclaimer: I am not a Google fan). If you compare the Google Chrome source code vs Firefox you will quickly understand how miles ahead Google is.

To be fair though Chrome was started from scratch in 2007/2008 whereas Firefox has a lot of legacy stuff still hanging around from the early 2000s.

Chrome was started off of WebKit, which also has legacy from many years earlier. Both WebKit and Gecko have code that dates to before the year 2000 in fact.

This is pretty much expected for a huge multimillion line C++ codebases, like all web browsers currently are. All have crufty parts (not sure why GP thinks one browser has nicer code overall? That's not my opinion based on the code I've read.)

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#26
post #6

I never liked Mozilla for a number of experiences: Their transition from an open source project to an organization receiving millions from the Google search box. The restrictions (based on security reasons) to install an extension from a site different than mozilla addons. For me this was a prequel of app stores. Mozilla Thunderbird team had no respect for people who reported bugs: they closed important bug reports.…

>Their transition from an open source project to an organization receiving millions from the Google search box.

I have no problem with this as long as they use the funding to continue producing open source software. I don't think it would be possible for them to compete with Chrome as a pure open source project with no major funding. Mozilla's role since its founding of providing a viable alternative FOSS browser is just as valuable and appreciated now as it was in the IE days, imho.

>The restrictions (based on security reasons) to install an extension from a site different than mozilla addons. For me this was a prequel of app stores.

For a product aimed primarily at easily-duped non-tech lay people, I have no problem with this either. As long as the addons remain FOSS.

>Lack of respect for extension developers breaking compatibility between versions and not clearly isolating extensions.

As a FF user I can live with this, as long as the breaking changes move the browser forward technically, or get rid of some legacy cruft, or similar. It's definitely not in FF's interest either, as it incentivizes users to try other browsers, so I expect it's on their todo list, just maybe not as high a priority as other issues.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#27
post #6

I never liked Mozilla for a number of experiences: Their transition from an open source project to an organization receiving millions from the Google search box. The restrictions (based on security reasons) to install an extension from a site different than mozilla addons. For me this was a prequel of app stores. Mozilla Thunderbird team had no respect for people who reported bugs: they closed important bug reports.…

>Their transition from an open source project to an organization receiving millions from the Google search box. I have no problem with this as long as they use the funding to continue producing open source software. I don't think it would be possible for them to compete with Chrome as a pure open source project with no major funding. Mozilla's role since its founding of providing a viable alternative FOSS browser is…

> As a FF user I can live with this...

The issue is from the developer perspective but also (although invisible) from the user side. Extension developers make titanic work and users can loose some extensions in the way of compatibility. Obviously important brands will never be incompatible but less known extensions will.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#28

One of the slides shows a benchmark where Rust beats GCC; it would be really nice to see the code.

I don't know which code Brendan was using, but using the http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ implementations I ran some tests of my own:

  Performance counter stats for './nbody.gcc_run 50000000' (5 runs):

       6232.525219 task-clock                #    0.999 CPUs utilized            ( +-  0.09% )
               533 context-switches          #    0.086 K/sec                    ( +-  0.43% )
                 1 CPU-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec                    ( +- 66.67% )
               166 page-faults               #    0.027 K/sec                    ( +-  0.15% )
    27,385,819,080 cycles                    #    4.394 GHz                      ( +-  0.05% ) [83.31%]
    19,494,722,200 stalled-cycles-frontend   #   71.19% frontend cycles idle     ( +-  0.07% ) [83.30%]
     6,403,657,640 stalled-cycles-backend    #   23.38% backend  cycles idle     ( +-  0.21% ) [66.70%]
    31,905,910,193 instructions              #    1.17  insns per cycle
                                             #    0.61  stalled cycles per insn  ( +-  0.01% ) [83.37%]
     1,902,954,908 branches                  #  305.326 M/sec                    ( +-  0.05% ) [83.36%]
            39,925 branch-misses             #    0.00% of all branches          ( +- 31.16% ) [83.34%]

       6.239027874 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.08% )


  Performance counter stats for './nbody_rustc 50000000' (5 runs):

       6970.131625 task-clock                #    0.999 CPUs utilized            ( +-  0.07% )
               601 context-switches          #    0.086 K/sec                    ( +-  0.33% )
                 5 CPU-migrations            #    0.001 K/sec                    ( +-  7.41% )
             1,024 page-faults               #    0.147 K/sec                    ( +-  0.02% )
    30,587,917,853 cycles                    #    4.388 GHz                      ( +-  0.04% ) [83.31%]
    19,368,464,950 stalled-cycles-frontend   #   63.32% frontend cycles idle     ( +-  0.06% ) [83.34%]
     7,348,766,082 stalled-cycles-backend    #   24.03% backend  cycles idle     ( +-  0.84% ) [66.69%]
    36,479,184,126 instructions              #    1.19  insns per cycle
                                             #    0.53  stalled cycles per insn  ( +-  0.01% ) [83.35%]
     2,404,008,283 branches                  #  344.901 M/sec                    ( +-  0.04% ) [83.35%]
            65,846 branch-misses             #    0.00% of all branches          ( +- 11.89% ) [83.33%]

       6.977211938 seconds time elapsed
The C version is here: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u32/program.php?test... . It appears to be the fastest C verson on the site. The Rust version looks pretty gross (it's likely very old code), I'd like to try porting the C version to Rust (it's only 140 lines) and compare the results. Note also that I'm using a version of the compiler that's so new that it's not even in the official repo yet, containing optimizations for floating-point math.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#29
post #2

Rewriting the browser stack in an evolving language feels like trying to shoot the moon. However, I hesitate to bet against Mozilla when it comes to impossible rewrites.

I love the idea. It will give Rust lots of feedback about real-world, practical problems that arise on large-scale software. I think it will make it all that much more likely that Rust will be an industrial strength systems language.

Re: Memories of Mozilla at 15 and Thoughts on Mozilla Research

#30
post #28

One of the slides shows a benchmark where Rust beats GCC; it would be really nice to see the code.

I don't know which code Brendan was using, but using the http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ implementations I ran some tests of my own: Performance counter stats for './nbody.gcc_run 50000000' (5 runs): 6232.525219 task-clock # 0.999 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.09% ) 533 context-switches # 0.086 K/sec ( +- 0.43% ) 1 CPU-migrations # 0.000 K/sec ( +- 66.67% ) 166 page-faults # 0.027 K/sec ( +- 0.15% ) 27,385,819,080 cycles #…

Change the sqrt call to use the sqrtf32() intrinsic. That's the modification we made to make nbody fast.
Post reply on HN