5 ms·

Would you rather have people in standards groups to act more like competitors instead of coworkers? Cause that seems like a really bad idea. As for: > For any

by Jaepa 9y ago

Would you rather have people in standards groups to act more like competitors instead of coworkers? Cause that seems like a really bad idea. As for: > For anyone who believes money to be some kind of motivating thing, it isn't hard to come to the conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-proxy > edit: And apparently I have to have "hits" to my name to state that getting 85% of your revenue from Google puts your independence into question??? You aren't bring its independence into question, you are stating its an easy conclusion that Mozilla is Google-by-proxy. The 85% was from 2011. As of 2015 Mozilla stop receiving cash from Google inpart to them changing there default searches (why google paid Mozilla). That may have changed recently with Firefox 57 as they change the default search back, but even then google announced a while back they were cutting how much they were going to pay, so I doubt it will be the same 85%.

jstewartmobile 9y ago
If they paired up with a search provider other than Google, does that make them any more independent? If they only get 70%, or 50%, of their income from a search engine, does that make them independent? A non-profit that has a taxable subsidiary and receives the bulk of its funding from the search industry does not strike me as being particularly independent.
- roca 9y ago
  What are you claiming now? Are you claiming Mozilla was the tool of Google, switched to being the tool of Microsoft or Yahoo, and then back to being the tool of Google? Or are you claiming that Mozilla is the tool of the "search industry" which is some amorphous group containing all of the above? Google (and other companies in some countries) pay Mozilla to be the default search in Firefox. It's a business transaction and adequately explains why Mozilla gets paid. Conspiracy-theorizing claims that secret terms bind Mozilla to some hidden agenda should not be believed in the absence of evidence, and I haven't seen any. (And I'm a former Mozilla Distinguished Engineer.)
  - jstewartmobile 9y ago
    It is super, super simple. When 80%+ of your revenue depends on a search engine, and you still have payroll to make, you are by definition dependent upon it, regardless of which one it happens to be at the time. The article title is "Maintaining an Independent Browser is Expensive". I'm just calling it out. From the tone of the replies, kicked off by a guy in the analytics industry who went so far as to google me for a comment, Upton Sinclair is screaming from the grave: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" edit: And granted, they can currently play Google against Bing, although that isn't a terribly impressive degree of freedom. edit edit: And where did the word "secret" enter into the conversation? It's like you depend on a search engine (or a batch of them during your break from Google) for most of your revenue, and I'm the one who has to prove that you're not influenced by that???
    - roca 9y ago
      I left Mozilla nearly two years ago so you can lay off the baseless speculations about my salary, thanks. Incidentally I explicitly defined "independent" in my blog post: "I mean a browser with its own implementation of HTML, CSS, JS, etc". Choosing an alternative definition and then ranting about it is irrelevant to what I wrote.
      - jstewartmobile 9y ago
        I'm sorry. That's not how this works. dependent *adj* 1. free from outside control; not depending on another's authority. 2. not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence. It is not disputed that they have made their contribution to the implementation babel of web "standards". It is disputed, right here, that they are more of a spoke in the wheels of online advertising than a heroic champion of the open web.
    - roca 9y ago
      Also you didn't answer my questions. Please spell out exactly who you think is influencing Mozilla, and to do what (that Mozilla wouldn't normally do for the sake of their mission). And please support your claims with evidence. ("X pays $Y to Mozilla" is already adequately explained by the fact that Firefox-generated search traffic is valuable to X.)
moz23 9y ago
Citations for "cutting how much they were going to pay"? Mozilla revenue is up, they're making a LOT of profit, and the Yahoo deal was supposed to be 5 years so they're not likely to be losing money by switching to Google: https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-revenue-jump-fuels-its-firefox-overhaul-plan/ https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-revenue-jump-fuels-its-fir...
- Jaepa 9y ago
  Well in all fairness the deal with Yahoo kind of went side wise. But yeah I would agree its probably around equal. As for the source, I can't seem to find a source for this. I may have been mistaken, but it was something I heard several years ago on a google related podcast.

by Jaepa 9y ago

jstewartmobile 9y ago

If they paired up with a search provider other than Google, does that make them any more independent? If they only get 70%, or 50%, of their income from a search engine, does that make them independent? A non-profit that has a taxable subsidiary and receives the bulk of its funding from the search industry does not strike me as being particularly independent.

roca 9y ago
What are you claiming now? Are you claiming Mozilla was the tool of Google, switched to being the tool of Microsoft or Yahoo, and then back to being the tool of Google? Or are you claiming that Mozilla is the tool of the "search industry" which is some amorphous group containing all of the above? Google (and other companies in some countries) pay Mozilla to be the default search in Firefox. It's a business transaction and adequately explains why Mozilla gets paid. Conspiracy-theorizing claims that secret terms bind Mozilla to some hidden agenda should not be believed in the absence of evidence, and I haven't seen any. (And I'm a former Mozilla Distinguished Engineer.)
- jstewartmobile 9y ago
  It is super, super simple. When 80%+ of your revenue depends on a search engine, and you still have payroll to make, you are by definition dependent upon it, regardless of which one it happens to be at the time. The article title is "Maintaining an Independent Browser is Expensive". I'm just calling it out. From the tone of the replies, kicked off by a guy in the analytics industry who went so far as to google me for a comment, Upton Sinclair is screaming from the grave: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" edit: And granted, they can currently play Google against Bing, although that isn't a terribly impressive degree of freedom. edit edit: And where did the word "secret" enter into the conversation? It's like you depend on a search engine (or a batch of them during your break from Google) for most of your revenue, and I'm the one who has to prove that you're not influenced by that???
  - roca 9y ago
    I left Mozilla nearly two years ago so you can lay off the baseless speculations about my salary, thanks. Incidentally I explicitly defined "independent" in my blog post: "I mean a browser with its own implementation of HTML, CSS, JS, etc". Choosing an alternative definition and then ranting about it is irrelevant to what I wrote.
    - jstewartmobile 9y ago
      I'm sorry. That's not how this works. dependent *adj* 1. free from outside control; not depending on another's authority. 2. not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence. It is not disputed that they have made their contribution to the implementation babel of web "standards". It is disputed, right here, that they are more of a spoke in the wheels of online advertising than a heroic champion of the open web.
  - roca 9y ago
    Also you didn't answer my questions. Please spell out exactly who you think is influencing Mozilla, and to do what (that Mozilla wouldn't normally do for the sake of their mission). And please support your claims with evidence. ("X pays $Y to Mozilla" is already adequately explained by the fact that Firefox-generated search traffic is valuable to X.)

moz23 9y ago

Citations for "cutting how much they were going to pay"? Mozilla revenue is up, they're making a LOT of profit, and the Yahoo deal was supposed to be 5 years so they're not likely to be losing money by switching to Google: https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-revenue-jump-fuels-its-firefox-overhaul-plan/ https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-revenue-jump-fuels-its-fir...

Jaepa 9y ago
Well in all fairness the deal with Yahoo kind of went side wise. But yeah I would agree its probably around equal. As for the source, I can't seem to find a source for this. I may have been mistaken, but it was something I heard several years ago on a google related podcast.