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

Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 77 posts

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#51

Post by bad_user »

philipov wrote: post #12
AlotOfReading wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, advertising doesn't do much to help Mozilla if it removes the main differentiator Firefox has from vastly more popular competitors. Firefox with "privacy respecting advertising" sounds an awful lot like Chrome with compatibility issues.

Yes. There is no such thing as privacy-respecting advertising. If they mess with extensions like Chrome did, they're going to lose their user base. A much higher proportion of us are only using Firefox because it's not connected to AdTech.

Firefox has been literally funded by Google's Ads, that Search deal having kept Mozilla alive. With all due respect, Firefox not being connected to AdTech is a hallucination.

Actually, all 3 major browser engines are directly funded by Google's Ads. And while you may have noticed that Mozilla and Apple have been singing the privacy tune, you should've also noticed that they never did anything to upset their cash cow.

Mozilla diversifying their revenue would be an improvement IMO. But whatever they did in the past, people got mad, because many imagine that such a complex piece of software could be developed for free or from the donations of individuals that ad-block YouTube instead of paying for Premium.

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#52

Post by RobotToaster »

tombert wrote: post #34
hagbard_c wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the store clerk took home some of the supplies, what would the impact on the company's balance sheet be? Not significant but she'd be setting the wrong example by doing so. If the CEO of a non-profit insists on "pay equity" with her for-profit equivalents she should look for a job in a for-profit, not leach dry the non-profit. Enough of the bullshit with overpaid and underperforming Mozilla CEOs, time for a real c…

I broadly agree, though then the argument would be "well the best CEOs would go to for-profit places", and we might get worse CEOs leading the non-profits; if we had the non-profit pay for-profit wages, then they might be more appealing to more talented people. I'm not sure I actually agree with this argument, to be clear. I don't even know that I think the CEO does all that much; Elon Musk is the CEO of like three o…

We would probably be better off with non-profits run by non-profit oriented CEOs.

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#54

Post by hagbard_c »

tombert wrote: post #34
hagbard_c wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the store clerk took home some of the supplies, what would the impact on the company's balance sheet be? Not significant but she'd be setting the wrong example by doing so. If the CEO of a non-profit insists on "pay equity" with her for-profit equivalents she should look for a job in a for-profit, not leach dry the non-profit. Enough of the bullshit with overpaid and underperforming Mozilla CEOs, time for a real c…

I broadly agree, though then the argument would be "well the best CEOs would go to for-profit places", and we might get worse CEOs leading the non-profits; if we had the non-profit pay for-profit wages, then they might be more appealing to more talented people. I'm not sure I actually agree with this argument, to be clear. I don't even know that I think the CEO does all that much; Elon Musk is the CEO of like three o…

People like Musk, Jobs, Edison and others are valuable because they see future possibilities - not pipe dreams but real possibilities - and turn their attention towards realising those goals by putting together teams of people who stand a chance to get there. Some of them - Musk and Edison in this list - do some of the work themselves, others - Jobs - are more 'visionary leaders' who somehow manage to inspire or scare others towards achieving the goal. Once the company is up and running these types of leaders tend to look elsewhere to break new ground because the day-to-day grind of running those companies is not their thing.

Mozilla does not need to find future possibilities, it got its goals handed to it by Marc Andreessen via Netscape: create and maintain a browser. The task of a non-profit CEO is to make sure the company remains funded. This takes a different type of person, someone who has or manages to create contacts within places where money is to be found. The last series of Mozilla CEOs saw this differently, these women convinced themselves that they were there to 'change the world' by means of pushing ideologically loaded programs and propaganda onto it. They considered the true reason for being of their organisation - create and maintain a browser which competes against the duopoly by giving control back to the user - no more than a means to get the funding for their ideological crusade. They also increased their own piece of the pie markedly in the process in some strange realisation of Orwell's All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than the others quote.

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#55

Post by mossTechnician »

hagbard_c wrote: post #54
tombert wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I broadly agree, though then the argument would be "well the best CEOs would go to for-profit places", and we might get worse CEOs leading the non-profits; if we had the non-profit pay for-profit wages, then they might be more appealing to more talented people. I'm not sure I actually agree with this argument, to be clear. I don't even know that I think the CEO does all that much; Elon Musk is the CEO of like three o…

People like Musk, Jobs, Edison and others are valuable because they see future possibilities - not pipe dreams but real possibilities - and turn their attention towards realising those goals by putting together teams of people who stand a chance to get there. Some of them - Musk and Edison in this list - do some of the work themselves, others - Jobs - are more 'visionary leaders' who somehow manage to inspire or scar…

Elon Musk personifies the CEO who doesn't develop things (he infamously did not found Tesla, but purchased the right to say he did). Musk has used his power to push his personal and political ideologies on the world. I've never seen any other human receive more attention than the president of the United States during the president's first interview. Musk owns, runs and censors the "de facto public town square" as he sees fit.

You can criticize Mozilla's "women" for being political, but Elon Musk is the most politically active and powerful CEO in the world, possibly of all time.

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#56

Post by hagbard_c »

mossTechnician wrote: post #55
hagbard_c wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like Musk, Jobs, Edison and others are valuable because they see future possibilities - not pipe dreams but real possibilities - and turn their attention towards realising those goals by putting together teams of people who stand a chance to get there. Some of them - Musk and Edison in this list - do some of the work themselves, others - Jobs - are more 'visionary leaders' who somehow manage to inspire or scar…

Elon Musk personifies the CEO who doesn't develop things (he infamously did not found Tesla, but purchased the right to say he did). Musk has used his power to push his personal and political ideologies on the world. I've never seen any other human receive more attention than the president of the United States during the president's first interview. Musk owns, runs and censors the "de facto public town square" as he…

From what I understand Musk sees/saw Tesla as a vehicle (no pun intended) to fund his real purpose, that being "working towards becoming a multi-planetary species". Whether you consider this to be a sensible or achievable goal is not really relevant but it does seem to be his driving goal. From what I gather in older interviews with him and people around him he was involved in the design of the Tesla Roadster and model S as well as in the design of the Falcon 1. It is difficult to find, let alone put any trust in objective material concerning Musk since he's been designated undesirable #2 (and more recently #1) by those who see him as the one who opened up what they considered to be their playground - Twitter - to the 'deplorables' and 'bitter clingers'. This, by the way, is another reason to compare him to Edison who also had and has a polarising effect with some people seeing him as a true innovator while others see him as an egotistical businessman who was intent on stealing others' credit for personal profit and who wielded patents as weapons to keep out superior competition in the form of (Nikolai Tesla's) AC power networks.

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#58

Post by philipov »

bad_user wrote: post #51
philipov wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. There is no such thing as privacy-respecting advertising. If they mess with extensions like Chrome did, they're going to lose their user base. A much higher proportion of us are only using Firefox because it's not connected to AdTech.

Firefox has been literally funded by Google's Ads, that Search deal having kept Mozilla alive. With all due respect, Firefox not being connected to AdTech is a hallucination. Actually, all 3 major browser engines are directly funded by Google's Ads. And while you may have noticed that Mozilla and Apple have been singing the privacy tune, you should've also noticed that they never did anything to upset their cash cow.…

The salient difference is that Chrome kneecapped extensions, while Firefox has not. The more they get involved with ads, the more likely they become to mess with that. It will not go well.

Re: Growing Mozilla – and evolving our leadership

#60

Post by JohnFen »

ris wrote: post #39
28304283409234 wrote: post #26

Let. Me. Pay. For. Firefox. I pay for other services online. I pay for VPN, for ElementaryOS, for Fastmail. Paying is fine. I pay, you give me a service that does not spy on me. It is not that hard.

Have you ever donated? What services do you want that shouldn't be available to non-paying users.

There is no way to donate to Firefox.
Post reply on HN