3 ms·

I’m not sure “killed” is the correct term as most of Mozilla’s offerings have been free and often open source. I think “discontinued” or something like “stopped

I’m not sure “killed” is the correct term as most of Mozilla’s offerings have been free and often open source. I think “discontinued” or something like “stopped internal development of” would be more sensible, but I guess that wouldn’t make a good domain name or get the clicks.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
Most of Google's offerings that get killed are free and HN jumps all over that (rightfully, IMO).
- stonogo 6y ago
  Different sense of the word 'free' in use here.
  - wizzwizz4 6y ago
    Libre versus gratis. You can charge for free software if you like.
- toyg 6y ago
  No Google product is ever free: you pay for it with your data.
floatingatoll 6y ago
It's an effective word for manipulating the emotions of the reader, and neatly sidesteps the HN prohibition on clickbait titles by putting it in the domain name where it can't be corrected to something less manipulative. I don't necessarily think that it was malicious, and given the parallel to the Google site of the same name, I can't really object strongly, but it's still uncomfortable to see a domain name wielded in service of that outcome for any topic (even the original Google one).
- gilrain 6y ago
  It's just a domain shorthand at this point, like arewewhateveryet.com
- avery42 6y ago
  Sorry - that definitely wasn't my intention! Although to be clear, I don't mean this to be anything negative about Mozilla, just an interesting collection of their past projects. There are definitely some changes I can make to the copy though, especially since this list is meant to include everything from commercial products to experiments and internal tools. I think this differs from Killed by Google somewhat in that Google has killed off several commercially-viable products with active users, so I can see a possible intention there as a warning about relying on Google services. Edit: as another comment said below, "abandoned" is probably a better choice of words for a lot of these projects.
  - pvg 6y ago
    The killed by google site is not a great HN post - lists are not good HN posts, the discontinued products themselves usually get multiple lengthy discussions, etc. In Mozilla's case, the layoffs are fairly recent, the discontinued products and services have had their own front page discussions (there was one just yesterday), real people have actually lost their jobs, etc. Intentional or not, this sort of post feels a bit like gawking at a traffic accident.
selykg 6y ago
"Abandoned" is probably a bit more accurate.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago

Most of Google's offerings that get killed are free and HN jumps all over that (rightfully, IMO).

stonogo 6y ago
Different sense of the word 'free' in use here.
- wizzwizz4 6y ago
  Libre versus gratis. You can charge for free software if you like.
toyg 6y ago
No Google product is ever free: you pay for it with your data.

floatingatoll 6y ago

It's an effective word for manipulating the emotions of the reader, and neatly sidesteps the HN prohibition on clickbait titles by putting it in the domain name where it can't be corrected to something less manipulative. I don't necessarily think that it was malicious, and given the parallel to the Google site of the same name, I can't really object strongly, but it's still uncomfortable to see a domain name wielded in service of that outcome for any topic (even the original Google one).

gilrain 6y ago
It's just a domain shorthand at this point, like arewewhateveryet.com
avery42 6y ago
Sorry - that definitely wasn't my intention! Although to be clear, I don't mean this to be anything negative about Mozilla, just an interesting collection of their past projects. There are definitely some changes I can make to the copy though, especially since this list is meant to include everything from commercial products to experiments and internal tools. I think this differs from Killed by Google somewhat in that Google has killed off several commercially-viable products with active users, so I can see a possible intention there as a warning about relying on Google services. Edit: as another comment said below, "abandoned" is probably a better choice of words for a lot of these projects.
- pvg 6y ago
  The killed by google site is not a great HN post - lists are not good HN posts, the discontinued products themselves usually get multiple lengthy discussions, etc. In Mozilla's case, the layoffs are fairly recent, the discontinued products and services have had their own front page discussions (there was one just yesterday), real people have actually lost their jobs, etc. Intentional or not, this sort of post feels a bit like gawking at a traffic accident.

selykg 6y ago

"Abandoned" is probably a bit more accurate.