3 ms·
I think the whole "non profit" angle of Mozilla is suspect. When so much of their revenue is tied to search engines[0], they're really more of subsidiary than
by jstewartmobile 9y ago
I think the whole "non profit" angle of Mozilla is suspect. When so much of their revenue is tied to search engines[0], they're really more of subsidiary than a charity.
That, and having the marketing person insist that they need message tracking to prevent being blacklisted is shady as hell. Mozilla has plenty of smart people who already know several other ways to skin that cat.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation#Financing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation#Financing
- matt4077 9y agoSources of revenue are not relevant to the categorization as a non-profit. Only the use of funds is.
- jstewartmobile 9y agoMeeting all of the current legalities is a low bar. I'm sure there's some anti-smoking "non-profit" out there that gets 90% of its revenue from Philip Morris, and is 100% compliant with the law. Doesn't make it right though.