4 ms·

What do you suggest Mozilla do instead? Mozilla don't just fund the development of their own products they also fund research [1] and other projects [2]. [1]

What do you suggest Mozilla do instead? Mozilla don't just fund the development of their own products they also fund research [1] and other projects [2]. [1] https://research.mozilla.org/research-grants/ https://research.mozilla.org/research-grants/ [2] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/grants/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/grants/ In a perfect world Mozilla would be funded by donations. I donate to Mozilla but it's a pittance compared to what they get from Google.

input_sh 7y ago
I wouldn't suggest an alternative funding model as much as guess what will it be maybe a year or two from now. Key quote from the article: > Mozilla has launched Monitor, a data-breach reporting service; Lockwise, a password manager; and Send, a privacy-focused alternative to services such as WeSendit. It’s also beta-testing a VPN (virtual private network) service, which it hopes to market to privacy-conscious users. Once these web apps mature a bit, I expect to see them in a free tier + a premium behind the subscription (with the core browser of course remaining free). My hunch tells me that's why you'll see this front-and-centered if you open mozilla.org: > Firefox is more than a browser. Meet our family of privacy-first products
- scarface74 7y ago
  I guess they can also add a messenger, news client, a calendar, and an address book and call it Firefox Communicator....
  - marcosdumay 7y ago
    As long as it starts in less than 2 minutes and don't push Windows machine into trashing, why not?
- john_minsk 7y ago
  I wouldn't mind switching to Mozilla VPN.
ppfrc 7y ago
First, they should stop doing those things you mention. Also they should drop the stupid projects they keep releasing all the time. And their left-wing political advocacy. Leave that to the EFF/ACLU/etc. As they say, "Firefox is more than a browser". No, it should be just a browser. Second, they should push harder so the web has fewer features, so having an implementation of a web browser to compete with Chrome is not impossible (not even Microsoft could make a web browser, they had to switch to Blink! just think about that...) If they did this, Firefox (the browser, not the 20398492 products they've launched with the same name to prostitute the brand) could live on donations alone probably. But no, they have to keep wasting money.
The_rationalist 7y ago
Integrating chunks of chromium code into gecko should massively reduce their maintenance costs. E.g spidermonkey is sub-par to v8 since so many years. If mozilla invested the money it invest into spidermonkey, into v8, the web would be faster for everyone. Should I repeat? The web would be faster for everyone. Nodejs servers too and also electron apps. We would also get new js features, faster. But mozilla doesn't seems to get the point of open source. They have a reinventing the wheel cognitive disease that is going to stay.
- Jonnax 7y ago
  The point of opensource is to follow along with the leader?
  - The_rationalist 7y ago
    It is to make synergies through code sharing. Let's fork the Linux kernel into a redundant implementation and take half kernel developers in order to slow down progress by a factor of two.
    - saagarjha 7y ago
      I suggest you take a look at Blink’s history ;)
    - Jonnax 7y ago
      That's a bad comparison. They're not forks. Firefox's is a separate implementation. The equivalent would be asking BSD to merge with Linux.
- simion314 7y ago
  We don't need JS to get 2% more faster, the limits of those speed improvements were reached, web assembly combined with a compiled language could offer more speed. I would like to see Firefox move faster in implementing good web APIs, like the lazy loading of images, push for HTML and CSS improvements(like let me customize the numeric text input arrows with css instead of forcing me to use a JS library) . Maybe the Rust rewrite will make Firefox better achitected so you could have a node version based on Mozilla technologies or you could easily use the web assembly VM in your application without having to load the full Chrome code.
idoubtit 7y ago
All of the non-research grants were in 2006-2013. Has Mozilla stopped this policy of semi-random funding of external projects? Some of these grants surprised me. For example, $270,000 for the translation and accessibility of the USA presidential election of 2012.
- ppfrc 7y ago
  Just imagine not being from the US, donating to Mozilla so they improve Firefox, and they instead spend the money on translating the USA presidential election.
  - fwn 7y ago
    Right now my parent is getting downvoted but I think that there's a great truth in this comment: A lack of focus generally hurts an organizations legitimacy in the eyes of it's donors. Increasing the quality of a countries national elections isn't a goal I'd immediately assume to be part of Mozillas mission, so I'd be disappointed about such a project. They could go the more transparent route and create a second organization for funding things their management likes. ... but I assume that such an organization would probably have some funding problems.
    - ppfrc 7y ago
      That's exactly my point. The Mozilla Corporation executives want money for their left-wing causes, so they are basically stealing it from Firefox's pockets.
      - fwn 7y ago
        Just to be clear: I didn't want to imply anything political and the given example of improving elections isn't really a left- or right wing thing. It's just hard for donors to understand how such a project might relate to the Mozilla brand. Just to give a (hopefully) completely nonpolitical example: If they would start to collect art with donor money it would arguably delute their brand in a comparable manner.
buboard 7y ago
Integrate metamask by default in firefox before facebook pays them to integrate libra.
erikpukinskis 7y ago
> What do you suggest Mozilla do instead? Mozilla should sell two products: 1) Storage a la iCloud 2) Payment processing a la Paypal And for marketing purposes they should get into discovery of free/open web services, a la old school Yahoo. As a web site builder, I don't want to have to manage credit cards. As a user, I don't want to have to trust random web sites with my credit card info. I also don't want to be redirected to Paypal, I just want a secure wallet that can be used on web sites with a drop in <paymentframe recipient="foo@bar.com" usd="8999" description="BonsaiThing Pro 1 year subscription" /> or similar. As a web user, I want to be able to store my photos, downloads, music, documents, etc conveniently in a little cloud-synced folder. I want to be able to quickly give fine-grained access to different web apps to different parts of that space. Photo app wants to access my photos? Great. Github wants to access my repos? Fine. Photo app wants to access my repos? No. And the discovery thing... There's a ton of free software out there. Mozilla basically has shut the door behind it. "Thanks for the install. Good luck finding other Free tools to use with it." They should be building a directory of other free software that can be used with Firefox. I should be able to use my Mozilla account to post reviews, to discuss new apps that are voted up, etc. That will allow enthusiasts to start engaging socially with the brand in a way that Mozilla (not Twitter or Apple or Facebook) can control the identities. From there maybe there is some social identity service, but if it's just a way to engage the community—great. Like Hacker News is to YCombinator, Mozilla should provide a place for us to discuss and share web services. If they want to get into search, that's great. Write a new shitty open source search engine that any web site can federate with. Use Google for now, but use that money to dig us out of the hole Google put us in.
- clairity 7y ago
  i like the gist of both of your ideas but i'm not sure they are feasible for firefox, since both are expensive services (in different ways) that are a bit outside the competency and mission of firefox. i could see firefox providing hooks for 3rd parties to make those services easier to integrate however (and maybe charging a fee, e.g., to certify the 3rd party). that would fall squarely in their wheelhouse.
  - erikpukinskis 7y ago

input_sh 7y ago

I wouldn't suggest an alternative funding model as much as guess what will it be maybe a year or two from now. Key quote from the article: > Mozilla has launched Monitor, a data-breach reporting service; Lockwise, a password manager; and Send, a privacy-focused alternative to services such as WeSendit. It’s also beta-testing a VPN (virtual private network) service, which it hopes to market to privacy-conscious users. Once these web apps mature a bit, I expect to see them in a free tier + a premium behind the subscription (with the core browser of course remaining free). My hunch tells me that's why you'll see this front-and-centered if you open mozilla.org: > Firefox is more than a browser. Meet our family of privacy-first products

scarface74 7y ago
I guess they can also add a messenger, news client, a calendar, and an address book and call it Firefox Communicator....
- marcosdumay 7y ago
  As long as it starts in less than 2 minutes and don't push Windows machine into trashing, why not?
john_minsk 7y ago
I wouldn't mind switching to Mozilla VPN.

ppfrc 7y ago

First, they should stop doing those things you mention. Also they should drop the stupid projects they keep releasing all the time. And their left-wing political advocacy. Leave that to the EFF/ACLU/etc. As they say, "Firefox is more than a browser". No, it should be just a browser. Second, they should push harder so the web has fewer features, so having an implementation of a web browser to compete with Chrome is not impossible (not even Microsoft could make a web browser, they had to switch to Blink! just think about that...) If they did this, Firefox (the browser, not the 20398492 products they've launched with the same name to prostitute the brand) could live on donations alone probably. But no, they have to keep wasting money.

The_rationalist 7y ago

Integrating chunks of chromium code into gecko should massively reduce their maintenance costs. E.g spidermonkey is sub-par to v8 since so many years. If mozilla invested the money it invest into spidermonkey, into v8, the web would be faster for everyone. Should I repeat? The web would be faster for everyone. Nodejs servers too and also electron apps. We would also get new js features, faster. But mozilla doesn't seems to get the point of open source. They have a reinventing the wheel cognitive disease that is going to stay.

Jonnax 7y ago
The point of opensource is to follow along with the leader?
- The_rationalist 7y ago
  It is to make synergies through code sharing. Let's fork the Linux kernel into a redundant implementation and take half kernel developers in order to slow down progress by a factor of two.
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    I suggest you take a look at Blink’s history ;)
  - Jonnax 7y ago
    That's a bad comparison. They're not forks. Firefox's is a separate implementation. The equivalent would be asking BSD to merge with Linux.
simion314 7y ago
We don't need JS to get 2% more faster, the limits of those speed improvements were reached, web assembly combined with a compiled language could offer more speed. I would like to see Firefox move faster in implementing good web APIs, like the lazy loading of images, push for HTML and CSS improvements(like let me customize the numeric text input arrows with css instead of forcing me to use a JS library) . Maybe the Rust rewrite will make Firefox better achitected so you could have a node version based on Mozilla technologies or you could easily use the web assembly VM in your application without having to load the full Chrome code.

idoubtit 7y ago

All of the non-research grants were in 2006-2013. Has Mozilla stopped this policy of semi-random funding of external projects? Some of these grants surprised me. For example, $270,000 for the translation and accessibility of the USA presidential election of 2012.

ppfrc 7y ago
Just imagine not being from the US, donating to Mozilla so they improve Firefox, and they instead spend the money on translating the USA presidential election.
- fwn 7y ago
  Right now my parent is getting downvoted but I think that there's a great truth in this comment: A lack of focus generally hurts an organizations legitimacy in the eyes of it's donors. Increasing the quality of a countries national elections isn't a goal I'd immediately assume to be part of Mozillas mission, so I'd be disappointed about such a project. They could go the more transparent route and create a second organization for funding things their management likes. ... but I assume that such an organization would probably have some funding problems.
  - ppfrc 7y ago
    That's exactly my point. The Mozilla Corporation executives want money for their left-wing causes, so they are basically stealing it from Firefox's pockets.
    - fwn 7y ago
      Just to be clear: I didn't want to imply anything political and the given example of improving elections isn't really a left- or right wing thing. It's just hard for donors to understand how such a project might relate to the Mozilla brand. Just to give a (hopefully) completely nonpolitical example: If they would start to collect art with donor money it would arguably delute their brand in a comparable manner.

buboard 7y ago

Integrate metamask by default in firefox before facebook pays them to integrate libra.

erikpukinskis 7y ago

> What do you suggest Mozilla do instead? Mozilla should sell two products: 1) Storage a la iCloud 2) Payment processing a la Paypal And for marketing purposes they should get into discovery of free/open web services, a la old school Yahoo. As a web site builder, I don't want to have to manage credit cards. As a user, I don't want to have to trust random web sites with my credit card info. I also don't want to be redirected to Paypal, I just want a secure wallet that can be used on web sites with a drop in <paymentframe recipient="foo@bar.com" usd="8999" description="BonsaiThing Pro 1 year subscription" /> or similar. As a web user, I want to be able to store my photos, downloads, music, documents, etc conveniently in a little cloud-synced folder. I want to be able to quickly give fine-grained access to different web apps to different parts of that space. Photo app wants to access my photos? Great. Github wants to access my repos? Fine. Photo app wants to access my repos? No. And the discovery thing... There's a ton of free software out there. Mozilla basically has shut the door behind it. "Thanks for the install. Good luck finding other Free tools to use with it." They should be building a directory of other free software that can be used with Firefox. I should be able to use my Mozilla account to post reviews, to discuss new apps that are voted up, etc. That will allow enthusiasts to start engaging socially with the brand in a way that Mozilla (not Twitter or Apple or Facebook) can control the identities. From there maybe there is some social identity service, but if it's just a way to engage the community—great. Like Hacker News is to YCombinator, Mozilla should provide a place for us to discuss and share web services. If they want to get into search, that's great. Write a new shitty open source search engine that any web site can federate with. Use Google for now, but use that money to dig us out of the hole Google put us in.

clairity 7y ago
i like the gist of both of your ideas but i'm not sure they are feasible for firefox, since both are expensive services (in different ways) that are a bit outside the competency and mission of firefox. i could see firefox providing hooks for 3rd parties to make those services easier to integrate however (and maybe charging a fee, e.g., to certify the 3rd party). that would fall squarely in their wheelhouse.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago