151–158 of 158 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Mozilla of 2002 is vastly different than the Mozilla of recent.
Yeah, so is the internet. So what?
The new Mozilla does pathetic cash grabs and tries and fails to operate as a business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Growing and investing in Firefox remains our biggest priority. Mozilla Corporation’s leading aim is to grow as a meaningful, differentiated browser, trusted by over 200mil people. In 2025 the team made great progress shipping tab groups, vertical tabs, smart tabs, many sidebar integrations with AI companies and more. Mozilla Corp welcomed Anthony Enzor-DeMeo, the first technologist to serve as CEO in over 15 years. I…
> In 2026 there will be a focus on building tools and features for those who want AI, and for those who do not. We are the only browser who does this - and likely the only one that will.[1] I don't want any AI features to exist in the Firefox source code, since this increases Firefox's attack surface for no real gain to the product I want to use. The AI-enabled browser should be a separate product line for people who…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which companies do you expect to be taken out? Google and Microsoft will obviously remain. I have a hard time envisioning that OpenAI or Anthropic will go under - especially Anthropic, who are reportedly raking in billions from Claude subscriptions. Just from my armchair predictions, it's not really any of the juggernauts who have to worry, but rather the many companies springing up to try SaaS offerings with LLMs at…
OpenAI and Anthropic are bleeding money and both need hundreds of billions of dollars in the next couple of years to break even. Oracle is highly overleveraged and I am hoping that the bubble takes them out. You can find the gory details at Ed Zitron's blog. https://www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-the-ai-bubble-bursts...
I would dance on Oracle’s grave, but they have too much staying power because of their core database and ERP business.
> Mozilla is focused on deploying its roughly $1.4 billion worth of reserves to support “mission driven” organizations, according to a new report. > The nonprofit, also the parent of Firefox, is investing in artificial intelligence startups that are working on safety and governance issues in AI. Why?, they want to go bankrupt?, do they like burning money? I would understand investing in AI Tech... Brilliant if they u…
They want NGO grant money. They look at the latest and greatest buzzwords for government policy spending and tailor their efforts towards acquiring that money, 99% of which will go to salaries and bonuses, 1% of which will be spent on the mission du jour. Mozilla is a deeply corrupt and failed organization.
I read the "ledger" part of the state of mozilla and 80% of their $ still goes into Firefox and Thunderbird.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit odd requirement, but.. OK. I mean who is the malicious actor here, the AI, the human user or the AI provider? If the AI, then we shouldn't give it an agency (user should always vet the output). If it's the user, the AI is irrelevant to the question. And if it's AI provider, why would they train AI on such materials in the first place. The whole enterprise of this kind of safety doesn't make much sense to m…
> It's a bit odd requirement It is a realistic requirement for dealing with user generated content at scale, because this is a realistic requirement thing some people will do. We’ve seen this fold out over the past month from Grok.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We currently can't do "AI safety" even in bleeding edge alignment research so investing into some startups in that area is just burning money. Current LLMs/ViTs have non-zero probability of producing something unsafe and it's their inherent trait.
Just so I understand your comment, are you trying to say that the money on safety should go first into research? And not into a later startup, which is just putting lipstick on the pig? I agree to this understanding, no doubt about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The concern, I think, is that their spare cash is dwindling and thus financial prudence might be beneficial - especially for those who rely on the core Mozilla propositions like Firefox.
> is that their spare cash is dwindling They're an NGO, you can just... look this up, it's public.
The last I heard was that the Google rev-share agreement was on the skids and they stopped developing projects like Thunderbird and Fake Spotter because they were capital constrained.
If you know otherwise then you're better informed than I am I guess