5 ms·

if they don't do this, how do they make any money? (just asking)

by dmh2000 9y ago

Sylos 9y ago
Taking money from Google, which people dislike as well. Basically Mozilla is supposed to develop a browser that's faster than Chrome, more customizable than anything out there, doesn't allow even the vaguest conspiracy theory of something being privacy-infringing even if it's not, and do all of that without money.
- kuschku 9y ago
  So, you know, basically the same as every other open source project in existence, from Wikipedia to Linux, the countless distros and Linux desktops to Krita, GIMP and Blender. Completely Impossible /s
  - Karunamon 9y ago
    This. And if Mozilla cant develop a browser with $500M a year from Google, their problem is inefficient allocation of capital (I.e squandering it), not cash flow. 500M will employ a lot of developers.
  - Sylos 9y ago
    Wikipedia is completely different, because pretty much any user can contribute at any point in time. There's very little money involved for actually developing it, they mainly just need to maintain the infrastructure. And well, Linux is not different at all, it really isn't, as there's just as well a shitton of money going into Linux. Canonical, Red Hat, SUSE, Google, Facebook, heck even Microsoft, they all put a lot of money into Linux. Krita, GIMP, Blender, and the Linux desktops do not have anywhere close to the same need for development velocity, as there's much less competition in the space and as a result of that, but also just as a result of the things that they do, there not being as rapidly shifting requirements.
    - kuschku 9y ago
      And yet, none of them, not Linux, not Kubernetes, not even Chromium shovel ads for a TV show into my face. Or cooperate with German ad, tracking and publishing comoany Burda, and their subsidiary CliqZ. None of them use Google Analytics in their browser, like about:addons did. Not even Chromium.
      - Sylos 9y ago
        Yeah, because developing those pays off in other ways. And Mozilla has a contract with Cliqz that requires them to deanonymize the data and with Google to not use the data for anything else. It's perfectly possible to cooperate with companies that otherwise disrespect privacy in a privacy-respecting way, believe it or not. And just because Chromium doesn't have Google Analytics in it, doesn't mean it's not worse for privacy. Google for example uses your browsing history and bookmarks for profiling you, if you sign up to Chrome Sync.
        kuschku 9y ago
        > It's perfectly possible to cooperate with companies that otherwise disrespect privacy in a privacy-respecting way, believe it or not. Yes, and the Google Chrome versions for Enterprises and Education have the exact same contractual clause that Mozilla has w.r.t. Google Analytics. So either you trust this clause, or you don’t – in both cases, you need to trust Google.
        Sylos 9y ago
        Right. What relevance does Chrome for Enterprise/Education having this clause when neither Chrome for normal people nor Chromium have this clause? I do mostly trust Google, if they're legally bound to not do the things that I don't want them to do. The sanctions for privacy law violations being essentially nonexistent makes it often hard to, because those sanctions are then usually just yet another bullet point in their cost calculations, but contractual violations have much higher sanctions, so I don't see a particular problem there.
tomcooks 9y ago
They ask for donations more often than gutterpunks in front of supermarket They get money from Google, eBay, Yahoo to sponsor their search engines

if they don't do this, how do they make any money? (just asking)

Taking money from Google, which people dislike as well. Basically Mozilla is supposed to develop a browser that's faster than Chrome, more customizable than anything out there, doesn't allow even the vaguest conspiracy theory of something being privacy-infringing even if it's not, and do all of that without money.

kuschku 9y ago
So, you know, basically the same as every other open source project in existence, from Wikipedia to Linux, the countless distros and Linux desktops to Krita, GIMP and Blender. Completely Impossible /s
- Karunamon 9y ago
  This. And if Mozilla cant develop a browser with $500M a year from Google, their problem is inefficient allocation of capital (I.e squandering it), not cash flow. 500M will employ a lot of developers.
- Sylos 9y ago
  Wikipedia is completely different, because pretty much any user can contribute at any point in time. There's very little money involved for actually developing it, they mainly just need to maintain the infrastructure. And well, Linux is not different at all, it really isn't, as there's just as well a shitton of money going into Linux. Canonical, Red Hat, SUSE, Google, Facebook, heck even Microsoft, they all put a lot of money into Linux. Krita, GIMP, Blender, and the Linux desktops do not have anywhere close to the same need for development velocity, as there's much less competition in the space and as a result of that, but also just as a result of the things that they do, there not being as rapidly shifting requirements.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    And yet, none of them, not Linux, not Kubernetes, not even Chromium shovel ads for a TV show into my face. Or cooperate with German ad, tracking and publishing comoany Burda, and their subsidiary CliqZ. None of them use Google Analytics in their browser, like about:addons did. Not even Chromium.
    - Sylos 9y ago
      Yeah, because developing those pays off in other ways. And Mozilla has a contract with Cliqz that requires them to deanonymize the data and with Google to not use the data for anything else. It's perfectly possible to cooperate with companies that otherwise disrespect privacy in a privacy-respecting way, believe it or not. And just because Chromium doesn't have Google Analytics in it, doesn't mean it's not worse for privacy. Google for example uses your browsing history and bookmarks for profiling you, if you sign up to Chrome Sync.
      - kuschku 9y ago
        > It's perfectly possible to cooperate with companies that otherwise disrespect privacy in a privacy-respecting way, believe it or not. Yes, and the Google Chrome versions for Enterprises and Education have the exact same contractual clause that Mozilla has w.r.t. Google Analytics. So either you trust this clause, or you don’t – in both cases, you need to trust Google.
        Sylos 9y ago
        Right. What relevance does Chrome for Enterprise/Education having this clause when neither Chrome for normal people nor Chromium have this clause? I do mostly trust Google, if they're legally bound to not do the things that I don't want them to do. The sanctions for privacy law violations being essentially nonexistent makes it often hard to, because those sanctions are then usually just yet another bullet point in their cost calculations, but contractual violations have much higher sanctions, so I don't see a particular problem there.

tomcooks 9y ago

They ask for donations more often than gutterpunks in front of supermarket They get money from Google, eBay, Yahoo to sponsor their search engines