Live data from Hacker News

Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

infosec.press

101–110 of 851 posts

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#101

At least there are projects like ladybird coming up to fill their shows

And servo: I wish that one would get more mention as it's quite far along. Having multiple competing browsers again that are not controlled by megacorps would be great. Ladybird for browsing, Servo for embedding.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#103
post #72
post #41

>> He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission. > It may be just me, but I read this as “I don't want to but I'll kill AdBlockers in Firefox for buckerinos ”. Yes, that does seem like a pretty uncharitable interpretation of that quote. I read it as "we won't do it, even though it would bring in $150M US…

You wouldn't calculate the expected RoI of killing adblockers if killing adblockers was never considered.

> You wouldn't calculate the expected RoI of killing adblockers if killing adblockers was never considered.

I agree, although if someone isn't the kind of person who would calculate that, they're probably not the person who will become the CEO of a company that size in the first place. I don't think organizations have the right incentives in place to push people with those values to the top.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't really need money. Look at Mozilla's CEO compensation for example. It was 7 million USD in 2022. Seven. Million. For ruining a bastion of the open internet. The problem is the MBAs.

It still seems obscene to me that anyone at a non-profit, that begs for donations and volunteers, makes 7 figures. (Yes it's technically a company, but it's a company owned by a non profit.)

did people ask the supervisors of the foundation what do they think about this?

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#105
I think it's too late for Mozilla, since it seems they already squandered most of their good will, userbase and money.

At any rate, I think their only good path of to get rid of Gecko.

The best would be to replace it with a finished version of Servo, which would give them a technically superior browser, assuming Google doesn't also drop Blink for Servo. It may be too late for this, but AI agents may perhaps make finishing Servo realistic.

The other path would be to switch to Chromium, which would free all the Gecko developers to work on differentiating a Chromium-based Firefox from Chrome, and guarantee that Firefox is always better than Chrome.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#106
post #41

>> He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission. > It may be just me, but I read this as “I don't want to but I'll kill AdBlockers in Firefox for buckerinos ”. Yes, that does seem like a pretty uncharitable interpretation of that quote. I read it as "we won't do it, even though it would bring in $150M US…

I’d happily pay $100 a year for Firefox WITH an adblocker as long as part of the money is put towards ongoing internet freedom and preventing attestation

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#107
post #72
post #41

>> He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission. > It may be just me, but I read this as “I don't want to but I'll kill AdBlockers in Firefox for buckerinos ”. Yes, that does seem like a pretty uncharitable interpretation of that quote. I read it as "we won't do it, even though it would bring in $150M US…

You wouldn't calculate the expected RoI of killing adblockers if killing adblockers was never considered.

for it to be considered, somebody must have offered to pay that 150M. Or he considered going to somebody (we all know that somebody is Google) and asking them for that money in return for killing ad blockers.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#108

The state of Mozilla's current 'products': Firefox Mozilla VPN Mozilla Monitor Firefox Relay MDN Plus Thunderbird - Some of these products are just repackaged partnerships. - Firefox - Funded by Google with the search partnership bringing in $500M in revenue. (free) Mozilla VPN - Repackaged Mullvad VPN and using Mullvad servers. Mozilla Monitor - Repackaged HaveIBeenPwned. (free) Firefox Relay - No different to Simpl…

Isn't Thunderbird (more or less) independent? "Thunderbird operates in a separate, for-profit subsidiary of the Mozilla Foundation."

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#109
post #68

It's kinda frustrating that Mozilla's CEO thinks that axing ad-blockers would be financially beneficial for them. Quite the opposite is true (I believe) since a ton of users would leave Firefox for alternatives.

Which alternatives though? On Mac at least, I'm not aware of any viable non-Chromium alternatives.

What problems do people have? I use Firefox on Mac since a decade at least.

Re: Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

#110
post #85
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole web ecosystem was first run by VC money and everything was great until every corner was taken, the land grab was complete and the time to recoup the investment has come. Once the users were trapped for exploitation, it doesn’t make sense to have a browser that blocks ads. How are they supposed to pay software salaries and keep the lights on? People don’t like paying for software, demand constant updates and…

> The whole web ecosystem was first run by VC money Huh? Nexus was funded by CERN. Newsgrounds was never investor funded. Yahoo! Directory was just two guys, and you paid to be listed. There were no investors involved. WebCrawler was a university project. Altavista was a research project.

People seem to forget the non-commercial web ever existed.
Post reply on HN