3 ms·
The "making it simpler" for users is definitely only an excuse for Mozilla to not pay for the servers anymore. Kinda disappointed as uploading was a dry useful
by Quanttek 8y ago
The "making it simpler" for users is definitely only an excuse for Mozilla to not pay for the servers anymore. Kinda disappointed as uploading was a dry useful way to share in, high quality screenshots. I can't fathom that it would've cost then much to keep the platform running
- neilv 8y agoI wouldn't say "definitely". Just devil's advocate... Besides costs of running servers, also conceivable is potential competition with another service that they're trying to push (though they should have a smooth path to turn those users into uptake of the other service). Also conceivable is that there were costs for dealing with abuse of the service (e.g., excessively heavy users, human resources to respond to reports of criminal/harassing content). Or maybe privacy&security experts are finally shaking things up, and saying that Mozilla is still thinking too much like a dotcom.
- itronitron 8y agonot running a server that stores images uploaded by anyone on the internet also saves them from having to deal with any legal issues associated with running a server that stores images uploaded by anyone on the internet
- johntash 8y ago> I can't fathom that it would've cost then much to keep the platform running Depending on how many users used the service, I'd say it could definitely cost a lot. It depends a lot on whether they're using something like aws/gcp where you pay for all bandwidth too.