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

State of Mozilla

stateof.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–138 of 138 posts

Re: State of Mozilla

#131

Post by vGPU »

BrendanEich wrote: post #127
pseudalopex wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox's market share loss started years before Eich left.

So it's my fault when Firefox lost share to Chrome, and a mysterious coincidence, or at best nothing to my credit, that Brave grew from 0 to ~60M from 2015 when I cofounded it -- makes sense! Your obsession with me, evident in the need to well-ackshually almost every HN post that might be considered positive about my work, is frankly creepy. I've already been erased from Mozilla's site, a la Stalin-era pre-photoshop…

The man, the myth, the legend!

I would just like to thank you for continuing to stand up for what you believe in and fighting the good fight. Blessings be upon you :)

Re: State of Mozilla

#132

Post by pseudalopex »

BrendanEich wrote: post #127
pseudalopex wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox's market share loss started years before Eich left.

So it's my fault when Firefox lost share to Chrome, and a mysterious coincidence, or at best nothing to my credit, that Brave grew from 0 to ~60M from 2015 when I cofounded it -- makes sense! Your obsession with me, evident in the need to well-ackshually almost every HN post that might be considered positive about my work, is frankly creepy. I've already been erased from Mozilla's site, a la Stalin-era pre-photoshop…

Such wild extrapolations from a simply stated fact. They suggested you kept Firefox on the rails. Pointing out it was off the rails didn't imply you derailed it.

> Your obsession with me, evident in the need to well-ackshually almost every HN post that might be considered positive about my work, is frankly creepy.

This is nonsense. My comments about Brave have been infrequent and neutral or slightly positive mostly. Recently I did list common criticisms to correct a claim about why people disliked Brave. My criticisms of Mozilla and Firefox have been non technical decisions made after you left mostly if not only. And even pointing out when Firefox's decline began wasn't all about you. Any future for Firefox depends on understanding its decline.

> I've already been erased from Mozilla's site, a la Stalin-era pre-photoshop photo touchups.

Were you removed from any photos in this way? Or was it histrionic exaggeration?

Mozilla's site hosts posts by you, posts by others mentioning you, historical documents by you, and credits for your work.

> No worries -- let it go, the past is in the past.

I hope you believe this some day. For your sake.

Re: State of Mozilla

#133

Post by mavhc »

BrendanEich wrote: post #126
mavhc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course he doubled down on being on the wrong side of everything https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/business/brave-brendan-ei...

You still wear a mask? You're on the wrong side of that psyop, at least. But I'm not mandating that you unmask: if your face diaper makes you feel safe, by all means wear one. https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-s...

https://www.cochrane.org/news/statement-physical-interventio...

Re: State of Mozilla

#134

Post by vGPU »

pseudalopex wrote: post #132
BrendanEich wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's my fault when Firefox lost share to Chrome, and a mysterious coincidence, or at best nothing to my credit, that Brave grew from 0 to ~60M from 2015 when I cofounded it -- makes sense! Your obsession with me, evident in the need to well-ackshually almost every HN post that might be considered positive about my work, is frankly creepy. I've already been erased from Mozilla's site, a la Stalin-era pre-photoshop…

Such wild extrapolations from a simply stated fact. They suggested you kept Firefox on the rails. Pointing out it was off the rails didn't imply you derailed it. > Your obsession with me, evident in the need to well-ackshually almost every HN post that might be considered positive about my work, is frankly creepy. This is nonsense. My comments about Brave have been infrequent and neutral or slightly positive mostly.…

He didn’t say about Brave, he said about him. Considering the number of replies you’ve made bickering, I’d say he’s correct.

Re: State of Mozilla

#135

Post by justinclift »

pseudalopex wrote: post #129
BrendanEich wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, you weren't privy to confidential legal docs to which only I among the two of us could possibly have been a party, so you can stop making stuff up and cease the mindless parroting of incomplete and one-sided statements from 2014 Mozilla foundation crisis PR staff who never worked for me. The record of Mozilla mis-management and CEO over-compensation after I left, about which I'm free to comment, is…

You know perfectly well the circumstances of your departure were reported in the press. I added only the opinion the opposition was predictable. Your vague complaints about Mozilla's statements stopped short of claiming they were false. And a legal agreement allowing 1 party to publish substantial falsehoods without recourse would be extraordinary. The most reasonable inference is Mozilla's statements were substantia…

> a legal agreement allowing 1 party to publish substantial falsehoods without recourse

Wouldn't that include most employee termination agreements, where the (newly ex-) employee has to keep their mouth shut regardless of what their employer does or did?

Re: State of Mozilla

#136

Post by KingOfCoders »

pseudalopex wrote: post #129
BrendanEich wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, you weren't privy to confidential legal docs to which only I among the two of us could possibly have been a party, so you can stop making stuff up and cease the mindless parroting of incomplete and one-sided statements from 2014 Mozilla foundation crisis PR staff who never worked for me. The record of Mozilla mis-management and CEO over-compensation after I left, about which I'm free to comment, is…

You know perfectly well the circumstances of your departure were reported in the press. I added only the opinion the opposition was predictable. Your vague complaints about Mozilla's statements stopped short of claiming they were false. And a legal agreement allowing 1 party to publish substantial falsehoods without recourse would be extraordinary. The most reasonable inference is Mozilla's statements were substantia…

"And a legal agreement allowing 1 party to publish substantial falsehoods"

Gag contracts I have seen, gag the person leaving and getting the money, not the company. Companies have the challenge that thousands of employees can't say something, it's hard to enforce and easy to trip over and get burned.

Re: State of Mozilla

#137

Post by KingOfCoders »

pseudalopex wrote: post #130
KingOfCoders wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the techie perspective, Mozilla didn't have "best years" I think. As a Mosaic/Netscape/FF user, I liked Mozilla for two things, adhering to standards compared to IE and being open source (the second being the reason I still use it today, not because of technology (I don't like tab management with 50+ tabs open e.G, never liked the environment implementation)). I don't consider Firefox a technological marvel, but…

Mozilla's CEOs from 2008 to 2013 had technical backgrounds. And Bill Gates had vision and technical experience of course. So it seems hard to say technical CEOs are better consistently. Even if better means more innovative.

"And Bill Gates had vision and technical experience of course."

I think the developer, developer, developer days of M$ (ha, anyone?) were quite good. I did like MS Basic on CP/M (before using Turbo Pascal, first time I felt like a professional!). I started my Amiga development with AmigaBasic drawing lines and circles (before switching to 68k assembler).

Re: State of Mozilla

#138

Post by pseudalopex »

vGPU wrote: post #134
pseudalopex wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such wild extrapolations from a simply stated fact. They suggested you kept Firefox on the rails. Pointing out it was off the rails didn't imply you derailed it. > Your obsession with me, evident in the need to well-ackshually almost every HN post that might be considered positive about my work, is frankly creepy. This is nonsense. My comments about Brave have been infrequent and neutral or slightly positive mostly.…

He didn’t say about Brave, he said about him. Considering the number of replies you’ve made bickering, I’d say he’s correct.

He said about his work. And it would be objectively false either way. I'd say your hero worship affected your comprehension.
Post reply on HN