3 ms·
(I work for Mozilla) Firefox and Mozilla should be scrutinized to some degree. Firefox may be free of charge, and so I agree Mozilla is not directly beholden t
by sfink 5y ago
(I work for Mozilla)
Firefox and Mozilla should be scrutinized to some degree. Firefox may be free of charge, and so I agree Mozilla is not directly beholden to its non-paying users. But it is beholden to its mission statement, and it's fair to criticize Mozilla for anything that might violate that statement.
My understanding is that a "donate to Firefox" option is a logistical nightmare, would only be allowed in limited jurisdictions, and is not expected to earn all that much revenue. So in effect, the "donate to Firefox" button would end up mostly supporting the continued existence of the "donate to Firefox" button (lawyers ain't cheap!)
Purchasing services even if you don't use them (eg Firefox VPN; I'm not sure what else has been released yet) is the most direct way of donating to Mozilla Corporation and thereby funding Firefox development. The most important component of which is my personal salary. Thanks in advance!
- iam-TJ 5y agoThanks for working on such a great project. I've seriously hacked on the codebase about a decade ago and recall what a minefield it can be! I'm not going to purchase a service I'll never use - I'm also philosophically opposed to centralised 3rd party VPN endpoints no matter who operates them. It's not a "Private" network, it's simply a proxy to side-step (most) ISP level interference or geo-fencing by services. But if Mozilla can re-sell the Mullvad VPN service then sell me a unique personalised copy of Firefox that has my name in the Help>About* dialog! No messing about with donations then :) *actually just read the string from a (possibly downloaded) prefs.js/user.js key.