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

Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 214 posts

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#111

Post by TheZenPsycho »

anaphor wrote: post #29
ender7 wrote: post #11

If this were any other company I don't think this would turn any heads. However, much of Mozilla's ethos and community support is built on ethical rather than capitalistic foundations. It's hard to reconcile thoughts on a company that seems to so value freedom in some areas but not in others [1]. [1] Inferring what Mozilla values based on the opinions of its CEO is not particularly fair , but then again I'm not sure…

Even if Mozilla started actively discriminating against people and campaigning against minority rights I would have no problem taking the code and starting a forked version. IMO that's what's so great about FLOSS, if you disagree with how something is managed you can ignore the people who created it and start your own version along with other people who agree. So I wouldn't really be worried about the current state o…

Yes that's the fantasy. The reality is you can't just casually fork a project as big as mozilla. The only way that codebase stays even barely maintained with security bug fixes, is with its army of coders. The great thing about FLOSS is that it's POSSIBLE. The not so great thing about it is, in many cases you're probably better off just starting from scratch.

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#112

Post by woofyman »

hkphooey wrote: post #72
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being gay isn't a belief.

If it's not a choice or a belief, is it genetic?

In my personal experience as a gay man it's not a choice. It may or not be genetic but it's definitely innate.

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#113

Post by badman_ting »

Camillo wrote: post #65

I'd like to urge everyone to consider whether it's a good idea to comment on this story. If you voice an opinion in support of Eich, obviously that's going to be a liability in the future. But voicing an opinion against him is also a liability - there is no telling how the zeitgeist might change ten or twenty years from now. I think it's best to voice no opinion at all - and I hope this comment is not misconstrued as…

To paraphrase Bert Cooper, who is really making the comment anyway?

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#114

Post by dinkumthinkum »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #52
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #9

Meh. Prop 8 passed the people's vote with 7,001,084 Californians voting in favor of it and 6,401,482 voting against. Are we to start boycotting every company that employs one of those 7 million people? I'm glad it was made right in the end and I hope at least some of those 7 million people have changed their opinion... but I don't think we need to keep dwelling on it.

Welcome to Hacker News, bastion of intellectual freedom, where large number of people will now argue that you should be deprived of employment because you donated money to certain unpopular political campaigns. Next steps include: calling for the resignation of anyone who voted Republican in a recent election.

Deprived of an employment is a bit silly. Representing a company as its CEO is different than being a regular employee.

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#116

Post by eridius »

hugi wrote: post #99
wodenokoto wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the not in "but not in others" is over-qualifying. Saying that Mozilla does not value gay rights because of 1000 dollars, donated once, indirectly associated with Mozilla is a crazy given how much they actually spend directly on supporting the cause yearly. I'm not saying that a care package for 1.000 dollars negates Eichs contribution. But you can't say they don't value gay rights either.

What type of person you choose to head your operations obviously reflects your ideals. It really doesn't matter if Mr. Eich donated 1000 dollars or a million dollars, he opposes basic human rights. And apparently Mozilla is fine with that.

He opposed basic human rights.

Does Mr. Eich still feel the same now as he did when he made that donation? I haven't done any research on this topic outside of the linked Ars article, but I find it interesting that Eich's own statement[1] about his donation completely avoids talking about his motivations for the donation. He even implied that he does not feel animosity towards gay people (although what he explicitly said was that the donation does not constitute evidence of animosity). So I'm left wondering as to what Mr. Eich actually feels on the topic.

Yes, he donated money to a cause that opposed basic human rights, and that's undeniably an action worthy of condemnation. But in isolation, this 6-year-old action does not prove anything about his feelings on the matter today. What matters right now is how Mr. Eich will lead Mozilla going forward, not personal acts taken 6 years ago that were not on behalf of Mozilla.

[1]: https://brendaneich.com/2012/04/community-and-diversity/

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#117

Post by Karellen »

lawl wrote: post #53
Karellen wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"what the fuck has an affair to do with their political views?" Uh, integrity? If a politician won't keep probably the most solemn vow they've ever made, to the person they were most committed to in their life, in front of all the other people they care about most, why the fuck do you think they'll keep some fucking campaign promise to you and a bunch of other faceless citizens they've never met to make your lives be…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_marriage Just saying... Making public you're in an open relationship will kill your career as a politican just as fast, wanna bet?

Oh, you're almost certainly correct. Absolutely, there's the right thing to do which involves telling the truth but could cause difficulties, and then there's the easy "political" lie you can tell to try to stay popular and keep your career humming along and your salary rolling in.

But no-one said doing the right thing was easy. And you've still totally failed to convince me that I want the second type of person claiming to represent me in government.

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#118

Post by anaphor »

TheZenPsycho wrote: post #111
anaphor wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if Mozilla started actively discriminating against people and campaigning against minority rights I would have no problem taking the code and starting a forked version. IMO that's what's so great about FLOSS, if you disagree with how something is managed you can ignore the people who created it and start your own version along with other people who agree. So I wouldn't really be worried about the current state o…

Yes that's the fantasy. The reality is you can't just casually fork a project as big as mozilla. The only way that codebase stays even barely maintained with security bug fixes, is with its army of coders. The great thing about FLOSS is that it's POSSIBLE. The not so great thing about it is, in many cases you're probably better off just starting from scratch.

In the hypothetical scenario that Mozilla management decides to start discriminating against gay people I think we can count on the support of many of the people who are familiar with the codebase. Would you agree?

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#119

Post by drone »

kefka wrote: post #86
Camillo wrote: post #65

I'd like to urge everyone to consider whether it's a good idea to comment on this story. If you voice an opinion in support of Eich, obviously that's going to be a liability in the future. But voicing an opinion against him is also a liability - there is no telling how the zeitgeist might change ten or twenty years from now. I think it's best to voice no opinion at all - and I hope this comment is not misconstrued as…

And I would argue that fighting against marriage rights (for LGBT) is our version of Jim Crow laws. History will show that people; all people deserve equal rights and protections under the law. Desegregation took decades, and arguably still isn't completely successful, given laws that disproportionately target black communities. And this isn't about a church refusing to marry someone because of their sexuality. This…

If it's important, shouldn't people be able to have a conversation, and fund a conversation?

The supreme court has equated financial contribution with speech, and many of us agree with that position.

Therefore, we can only see this as an attempt to ostracize and attack anyone who speaks to the opposite side. This action is chilling on speech, which is exactly what the OP was talking about. Just because you don't see it that way, doesn't mean it isn't, and won't be perceived by others that way.

I think proposition 8 was the wrong thing, promoted for bad reasons and on the wrong side of where society needs to be, but I also happen to feel that this attempt to quash any possibility of opposing free speech by ensuring to mob anyone who rises to the top having once taken a view we don't agree with as far more dangerous and harmful for our society than prop 8 could ever have been. It enforces positions without the liberty of allowing speech, and without the ability to challenge in court, as bad laws do.

Re: Gay Firefox developers boycott Mozilla to protest CEO hire

#120

Post by megablast »

lawl wrote: post #4

I totally see how this could upset people. But I'm not sure how his management qualities are tied to his political opinions. It's the same with politicans, what the fuck has an affair to do with their political views? I 100% support gay marriage. I also understand they're upset. But I don't know if this is the right reaction.

I see a big difference between having an affair, and spending money to whatever the equivalent is (a proposition to end hetero marriages?).

The $1000 was a hateful spend.

Post reply on HN