21–30 of 33 posts
Kind of in a ranty mood today. I'd gladly pay to support development of Firefox if it were possible to fund it directly via something like a recurring subscription. Instead my only option is to donate to the Mozilla foundation which lists the following salaries for their executives (according to Charity Navigator): Mark Surman, President & Executive Director - $661,886 J Bob Alotta, Svp, Global Programs - $417,327 An…
Kind of in a ranty mood today. I'd gladly pay to support development of Firefox if it were possible to fund it directly via something like a recurring subscription. Instead my only option is to donate to the Mozilla foundation which lists the following salaries for their executives (according to Charity Navigator): Mark Surman, President & Executive Director - $661,886 J Bob Alotta, Svp, Global Programs - $417,327 An…
Find a way to skip the overpaid Mozilla Foundation and we'll start contributing to Firefox.
Kind of in a ranty mood today. I'd gladly pay to support development of Firefox if it were possible to fund it directly via something like a recurring subscription. Instead my only option is to donate to the Mozilla foundation which lists the following salaries for their executives (according to Charity Navigator): Mark Surman, President & Executive Director - $661,886 J Bob Alotta, Svp, Global Programs - $417,327 An…
Are those supposed to be high? What's a reasonable salary for executives? The same site lists the following salaries for American Red Cross: Gail Mcgovern, President & Ceo $859,260 Clifford Holtz, Chief Operating Officer $749,814 Chris Hrouda, President Of Biomedical Services $696,337 Shaun Gilmore, Chief Transformation Officer $619,929 Brian Rhoa, Chief Investment Officer $610,239 Is there any indication Mozilla's s…
I bet if you get rid of those bunch, it will have net positive effect on Mozilla. These people are just leeches IMO. They get paid X number of times of the average Mozilla employee, but they don't really deliver X number of times the value.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For those who've lost track of that situation, can you provide a link or two? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/06/technology/google-search-... I mean, it's the same situation as last year. Google lost the lawsuit, got declared a monopoly, the DOJ said they'll force Google to stop paying Apple and Mozilla for placement on their devices/browser (for Mozilla that means losing $500 million in ARR), Google is appealing b…
A hellish irony then that weakening the near-monopoly on search redounds to strengthening the duopoly of web browsers.
That being said, I also don't think the browser "duopoly" is as entrenched as market share suggests. As Chromium is open source, the cost to the consumer of switching browsers is minimal; Chrome, Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera and un-googled Chromium all offer very similar browsing experiences and the main difference is small UI things. If Google does something anti-consumer, people can jump ship very easily. Other corporations can also fork Chromium very easily (as some have already done).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A hellish irony then that weakening the near-monopoly on search redounds to strengthening the duopoly of web browsers.
Kind of, yeah. The DOJ IMO is pretty ignorant. That being said, I also don't think the browser "duopoly" is as entrenched as market share suggests. As Chromium is open source, the cost to the consumer of switching browsers is minimal; Chrome, Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera and un-googled Chromium all offer very similar browsing experiences and the main difference is small UI things. If Google does something anti-consume…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kind of, yeah. The DOJ IMO is pretty ignorant. That being said, I also don't think the browser "duopoly" is as entrenched as market share suggests. As Chromium is open source, the cost to the consumer of switching browsers is minimal; Chrome, Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera and un-googled Chromium all offer very similar browsing experiences and the main difference is small UI things. If Google does something anti-consume…
Are any of the Chromium-based browsers going to retain manifest v2, or are they all stuck with neutered extensions? A quick search says even Vivaldi is going to lose v2 support later this year. Brave and Edge are non-starters.
not a reversal, it's exactly the same as before > You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. "operating" can be siphoning off for ads, telemetry, or AI slop generation
The whole clause is weird because Mozilla doesn't operate Firefox; the user does. So at face value, "you give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox" means you give Mozilla no rights, but obviously that's not the intent. Then they explicitly list a couple examples, but don't say the granted rights are limited to those examples, so the clause could mean practically anything. I'm curious if any lawyers can com…