4 ms·

It does not matter how few they are, if they are the ones making the decisions then they represent Mozilla. Unless dramatic change occurs immediately, we can on

It does not matter how few they are, if they are the ones making the decisions then they represent Mozilla. Unless dramatic change occurs immediately, we can only conclude that Mozilla is shoveling crapware into Firefox.

ams6110 9y ago
Ultimately, and I don't say this as an excuse but as reality: if you're not paying for it, you're not the customer. Yes Mozilla is a foundation and gets a lot of donations but you'd have a much stronger leg to stand on if you paid for the browser. Are you willing to pay $50 or more for a web browser so that there's no temptation for the vendor to sell out to advertisers?
- mediocrejoker 9y ago
  If it was a one time payment of $50 then the answer is yes, of course. How many people would need to pay that to fund the Firefox team for the next five years though? My guess is: not enough.
- lanstin 9y ago
  How about if I pay for pretty Apple hardware? Also I just used lynx yesterday and it was fine.
- makecheck 9y ago
  Yes, actually. At the same time though, we see examples of trust eroded even with payment (cable companies, or the latest Windows 10 crap). I suspect that it’s no longer enough to merely pay for such things; you need a way to verify trustworthy behavior top to bottom.
- mynewtb 9y ago
  Oh, stop that stupid trope already. There are many other ways of sustainable FOSS development, proven for decades. Look at sqlite, the Linux kernel, the GNU ecosystem etc.
- nasredin 9y ago
  Do we really need an update to a web browser every 6 weeks? A web browser should display information FULL STOP. When the new HTML standard comes out, implement it. Until then just provide security fixes. It's really not that hard or expensive (500 Million USD should be enough). Stop changing the UI, adding crap that should be addons (that's why there's addons), adding adverts, adding spyware ("telemetry"), etc. --- Curiously all the Mozilla developers and apologists who are so enthusiastic about defending Firefox (and down voting critical comments) have taken the day off...
  - acqq 9y ago
    > Until then just provide security fixes. You'd lose the non-security bug fixes and the performance improvements. I wouldn't like it, and it would surely be obsolete/irrelevant extremely fast.
    - nasredin 9y ago
      Regarding the performance improvements. Sometimes it seems it's more about job security. How many rewrites do you need? Mozilla's Law: (Use McConaughey Voice) As Intel processors get faster... Mozilla's software stays the same... speed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law
  - kyledrake 9y ago
    > Curiously all the Mozilla developers and apologists who are so enthusiastic about defending Firefox (and down voting critical comments) have taken the day off... I mean, it's Saturday, so yeah, they probably did. This comments section looks more like a pitchfork mob than a group that wants to have a reasonable and civil conversation about embedded extension policy and revenue models. I myself would prefer to spend it with my loved ones than arguing with a comments section mob on the internet.
    - tobbyb 9y ago
      It's interesting you choose to frame overwhelming dissent and anger at shady behavior as a 'mob'. By summarily dismissing a bunch of legitimate concerns by multiple users you are basically saying users don't matter. That kind of ivory tower attitude never worked well without leverage.
- jeremyjh 9y ago
  I've donated/paid more than $50 to open source projects that are less useful to me than Firefox. So yes, I would. While I know that Mozilla accepts donations, I don't think they've ever asked me for one.
  - akoncius 9y ago
    I see asking for domation in firefox bottom quite often
- kjsthree 9y ago
  Yes I am. But I am a small minority.
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
  > if you're not paying for it, you're not the customer Debian. FreeBSD. OpenBSD. Dillo. Netsurf. Or, Windows 10. Sometimes, free stuff is a product. Sometimes, you pay and are still the product.
  - ams6110 9y ago
    All of those projects have their constituencies, and it isn't always the typical end-user.

ams6110 9y ago

Ultimately, and I don't say this as an excuse but as reality: if you're not paying for it, you're not the customer. Yes Mozilla is a foundation and gets a lot of donations but you'd have a much stronger leg to stand on if you paid for the browser. Are you willing to pay $50 or more for a web browser so that there's no temptation for the vendor to sell out to advertisers?

mediocrejoker 9y ago
If it was a one time payment of $50 then the answer is yes, of course. How many people would need to pay that to fund the Firefox team for the next five years though? My guess is: not enough.
lanstin 9y ago
How about if I pay for pretty Apple hardware? Also I just used lynx yesterday and it was fine.
makecheck 9y ago
Yes, actually. At the same time though, we see examples of trust eroded even with payment (cable companies, or the latest Windows 10 crap). I suspect that it’s no longer enough to merely pay for such things; you need a way to verify trustworthy behavior top to bottom.
mynewtb 9y ago
Oh, stop that stupid trope already. There are many other ways of sustainable FOSS development, proven for decades. Look at sqlite, the Linux kernel, the GNU ecosystem etc.
nasredin 9y ago
Do we really need an update to a web browser every 6 weeks? A web browser should display information FULL STOP. When the new HTML standard comes out, implement it. Until then just provide security fixes. It's really not that hard or expensive (500 Million USD should be enough). Stop changing the UI, adding crap that should be addons (that's why there's addons), adding adverts, adding spyware ("telemetry"), etc. --- Curiously all the Mozilla developers and apologists who are so enthusiastic about defending Firefox (and down voting critical comments) have taken the day off...
- acqq 9y ago
  > Until then just provide security fixes. You'd lose the non-security bug fixes and the performance improvements. I wouldn't like it, and it would surely be obsolete/irrelevant extremely fast.
  - nasredin 9y ago
    Regarding the performance improvements. Sometimes it seems it's more about job security. How many rewrites do you need? Mozilla's Law: (Use McConaughey Voice) As Intel processors get faster... Mozilla's software stays the same... speed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law
- kyledrake 9y ago
  > Curiously all the Mozilla developers and apologists who are so enthusiastic about defending Firefox (and down voting critical comments) have taken the day off... I mean, it's Saturday, so yeah, they probably did. This comments section looks more like a pitchfork mob than a group that wants to have a reasonable and civil conversation about embedded extension policy and revenue models. I myself would prefer to spend it with my loved ones than arguing with a comments section mob on the internet.
  - tobbyb 9y ago
    It's interesting you choose to frame overwhelming dissent and anger at shady behavior as a 'mob'. By summarily dismissing a bunch of legitimate concerns by multiple users you are basically saying users don't matter. That kind of ivory tower attitude never worked well without leverage.
jeremyjh 9y ago
I've donated/paid more than $50 to open source projects that are less useful to me than Firefox. So yes, I would. While I know that Mozilla accepts donations, I don't think they've ever asked me for one.
- akoncius 9y ago
  I see asking for domation in firefox bottom quite often
kjsthree 9y ago
Yes I am. But I am a small minority.
yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
> if you're not paying for it, you're not the customer Debian. FreeBSD. OpenBSD. Dillo. Netsurf. Or, Windows 10. Sometimes, free stuff is a product. Sometimes, you pay and are still the product.
- ams6110 9y ago
  All of those projects have their constituencies, and it isn't always the typical end-user.