3 ms·

I 'm going to have to defend Mozilla here. There is this very perverse idea here that everything should be free, but that's only because you are used to using

I 'm going to have to defend Mozilla here. There is this very perverse idea here that everything should be free, but that's only because you are used to using VC-funded services with an expiration (acquisition) date. This seems to be endemic thinking in SV but the rest of the world has to make their own paycheck. Maybe mozilla should think of experimenting with some micropayment service though. They are ideally positioned for that.

probably_wrong 8y ago
I would argue that this position is contrary to Mozilla's stated values about freedom on the web. If they truly support freedom, that should include my freedom to decide which add-ons I want to run on my browser. Sure, they can have an opinion about where should the web go, and in fact it would probably be a very well-informed one. But they can't both claim to support freedom for their users while, at the same time, imposing their ideas on their users.
- ghostly_s 8y ago
  Which "position"? No one has even shared the stated reasoning for removing this extension yet. Just a bunch of people jumping at an opportunity to disparage Evil Mozilla in here with no details on the real situation. This whole thread should be deleted if you ask me.
wetpaws 8y ago
This is a huge PR issue for Mozilla given how their entire strategy nowadays is to promote free and open internet.