4 ms·

From what I understand Firefox is only a source of income, not a prioritized product. And yes: IMO this is kibd of backwards. Firefox has been their biggest co

From what I understand Firefox is only a source of income, not a prioritized product. And yes: IMO this is kibd of backwards. Firefox has been their biggest contribution to the open web and it seems they are treating it as just an income source.

eli 6y ago
I don't see how that could be true given that they continue to roll out features to Firefox.
- giancarlostoro 6y ago
  We're not saying Firefox isn't being maintained, we're saying donations don't go to Firefox, they go to the foundation which is also apparently funded by Firefox. Something really needs to change... We shouldn't have heard about basically what is crucial for developers being scrapped to keep the show running.
  - eli 6y ago
    The Foundation doesn't cover the payroll for the engineers working on Firefox?
    - shock 6y ago
      My impression from the layoffs thread from a couple weeks ago is that the Foundation does not employ engineers working on Firefox.
    - giancarlostoro 6y ago
      I dont think its fair to downvote you for asking a question. But no it does not seem to be the case.
    - thayne 6y ago
      No, Firefox is developed by Mozilla Corporation, which is a for-profit company owned by Mozilla foundation. As I understand it, this opens up the possibility of revenue sources not available to a non-profit for Firefox, but otoh, means you can't donate to support Firefox.
  - hvis 6y ago
    Last I saw the numbers, donations tally up to ~$10 million, and the search engine deal to ~$500 million. So I'm not sure what practical purpose you are aiming at.
fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
This is disappointing, but not surprising: there seems to be very little interest these days in funding the sort of work that created computers, the major operating systems and the internet. Software and tech is basically treated as a cost by everyone.
- numpad0 6y ago
  If we look at IRL, governments pay for infrastructure from taxes charged on citizens on non-voluntary basis. Maybe Mozilla Foundation is one of those infrastructures inherently unprofitable, unattractive, not price competent on individual level?
  - gibolt 6y ago
    Totally agree, but I'm not sure which government would fund it. I know the US heavily funds quite a few dev tools, but would be reluctant to fund large consumer facing tools without multiple country cooperation.
    - agustif 6y ago
      The EU likes privacy, most states already have weird public tv taxes and such. In spain you used to pay a canon/fee for every disk, hdd, or pendrive that can contain pirateed content, it's like a preemptive tax for everyone. lol...
  - franga2000 6y ago
    (EDIT: mainly talking about Firefox here) I don't think it's inherently unprofitable (and neither is most public infrastructure), but more that any possible step towards more profit would be almost always against the users' interest. Like with motorways and much of other public infrastructure, competition is basically impossible (and would be too inefficient) due to the sheer scale of the project, and letting a for-profit run it would be nothing but harmful to the public.

eli 6y ago

I don't see how that could be true given that they continue to roll out features to Firefox.

giancarlostoro 6y ago
We're not saying Firefox isn't being maintained, we're saying donations don't go to Firefox, they go to the foundation which is also apparently funded by Firefox. Something really needs to change... We shouldn't have heard about basically what is crucial for developers being scrapped to keep the show running.
- eli 6y ago
  The Foundation doesn't cover the payroll for the engineers working on Firefox?
  - shock 6y ago
    My impression from the layoffs thread from a couple weeks ago is that the Foundation does not employ engineers working on Firefox.
  - giancarlostoro 6y ago
    I dont think its fair to downvote you for asking a question. But no it does not seem to be the case.
  - thayne 6y ago
    No, Firefox is developed by Mozilla Corporation, which is a for-profit company owned by Mozilla foundation. As I understand it, this opens up the possibility of revenue sources not available to a non-profit for Firefox, but otoh, means you can't donate to support Firefox.
- hvis 6y ago
  Last I saw the numbers, donations tally up to ~$10 million, and the search engine deal to ~$500 million. So I'm not sure what practical purpose you are aiming at.

fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago

This is disappointing, but not surprising: there seems to be very little interest these days in funding the sort of work that created computers, the major operating systems and the internet. Software and tech is basically treated as a cost by everyone.

numpad0 6y ago
If we look at IRL, governments pay for infrastructure from taxes charged on citizens on non-voluntary basis. Maybe Mozilla Foundation is one of those infrastructures inherently unprofitable, unattractive, not price competent on individual level?
- gibolt 6y ago
  Totally agree, but I'm not sure which government would fund it. I know the US heavily funds quite a few dev tools, but would be reluctant to fund large consumer facing tools without multiple country cooperation.
  - agustif 6y ago
    The EU likes privacy, most states already have weird public tv taxes and such. In spain you used to pay a canon/fee for every disk, hdd, or pendrive that can contain pirateed content, it's like a preemptive tax for everyone. lol...
- franga2000 6y ago
  (EDIT: mainly talking about Firefox here) I don't think it's inherently unprofitable (and neither is most public infrastructure), but more that any possible step towards more profit would be almost always against the users' interest. Like with motorways and much of other public infrastructure, competition is basically impossible (and would be too inefficient) due to the sheer scale of the project, and letting a for-profit run it would be nothing but harmful to the public.