6 ms·

I find your demands reasonable, especially the principle where HTTP traffic is initiated if and only if carried out in response to direct user interaction. The

I find your demands reasonable, especially the principle where HTTP traffic is initiated if and only if carried out in response to direct user interaction. The thing with right to control, though, is that someone, somehow has to develop a browser and make ends meet.

endgame 5y ago
What if - and bear with me here - Mozilla set up a way for us to fund Firefox directly?
- fredoliveira 5y ago
  Shocking idea in 2022. No, but seriously, Mozilla — I'll pay you real dollars for this.
  - leeoniya 5y ago
    too late for me. they fired a ton of engineering talent working on exciting tech (servo) to chase some bundled vpn rebrand. what a misguided move, like most everything they've done in non-engineering space. sad. before, i would have donated hundreds or more if there was a way to pay directly for firefox and thunderbird. but not anymore. at least the CEO's salary keeps going up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563698
    - shubhamkrm 5y ago
      There's a way to directly donate to Thunderbird: https://give.thunderbird.net/en-US/ https://give.thunderbird.net/en-US/ Unfortunately, there's no such option for Firefox.
      - endgame 5y ago
        At this point, I'm starting to wonder whether or not Mozilla leadership is controlled opposition.
        lmm 5y ago
        I don't doubt the sincerity of the individuals involved, but Google wouldn't pay Mozilla if they didn't think it was in their interests to do so.
        wyclif 5y ago
        It is controlled opposition. And their CEO is not an engineer and has no clue how to manage engineers or run a software company; she's a lawyer.
        yownie 5y ago
        "Never attribute to Malice which can be explained by Stupidity"
- jdlshore 5y ago
  They have—it’s their VPN offering. (Cue complaints about it not being the right way to fund Firefox, because it’s not a pure donation. Before you go down that road, tell me: what evidence do you have that pure donations would get enough transactions to be worth the overhead? Have they ever worked at scale for any other software?)
  - fredoliveira 5y ago
    Their business model doesn't have to be donation-based. It can be, (surprise!) purchase based. I pay for lots of software I use, and do so happily if it delivers value — it would be extremely easy for me to justify paying for what's probably one of the apps I use the most. Why can't we pay for good browsers, that put the focus squarely on being the best tool to access the www? Why can't that money be used to hire back some of the talent Mozilla has been letting go? I say it elsewhere in this thread — Mozilla should let us pay for the bloody thing.
    - Shared404 5y ago
      I would pay for a "Firefox Pro" which allowed greater control/modifications for power users. Make it open source, but have the official download for builds (and source code?[0]) be payed. Bonus points if the download bundle includes source code and a simplified build process. [0] obviously it'll be mirrored in 2 seconds, but still.
      - chii 5y ago
        the few people who might pay for a firefox pro would probably not even pay the wages of the people required to setup the payment and infrastructure therein. Might as well just ask for donations.
      - shrikant 5y ago
        I wonder if they could do a "pay what you want" download page for Firefox Developer Edition. It's my daily driver, and I'd be happy to pay for it.
- Groxx 5y ago
  You have been able to for a very long time, quite possibly for all of its existence: https://donate.mozilla.org/ https://donate.mozilla.org/
  - endgame 5y ago
    People always post this in reply. I don't want to donate to the Mozilla Foundation's CEO salary package, or their navel-gazing side projects, or their endless reshuffling of deckchairs. I want to fund _Firefox_, the only browser engine keeping us from an endless monopoly of Chrome reskins.
    - fabrice_d 5y ago
      So you need to fund either individual developers or a 3rd party like Igalia to develop the features you want, including the work to ensure it will end up in the upstream repo and not in a fork.
    - Groxx 5y ago
      Since that's "a donation with restrictions", you can probably set up a grant / anything with a contract instead. It may be onerous for an individual, but get enough people to be worth the effort and it should work fine.
  - hnaccount141 5y ago
    Donations to the Mozilla Foundation support the Foundation's outreach and education efforts, not Firefox development. Firefox is developed by the Mozilla Corporation, which is a for-profit entity owned by the Foundation and is not donation-supported. See the sections "How will my donation be used?" and "Don’t Mozilla products, like Firefox, earn income?" here: https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/faq/#item_8 https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/faq/#item_8
  - dorgo 5y ago
    As far as I remember the problem was that you can donate to Mozilla foundation, but not the Mozilla corporation ( which is responsible for Firefox + other stuff ). There is no direct way to finance/donate for Firefox developement (without other projects).
- xeromal 5y ago
  Several thousand people would donate. Several million wouldn't care. Chrome wins.
- michaelje 5y ago
  But eventually the “need” for never-ending growth means a manager somewhere will be looking to eek out that x% growth - and their individual (professional) needs will lead to suggesting monetizing the paid user base…
  - josephg 5y ago
    Why would this be a default, or an inevitability? Sounds like a reasonable incentive structure for VC-funded companies looking to be a unicorn. But it’s far from the only option culturally. It certainly doesn’t seem like the sort of thing that makes sense for Mozilla.
charcircuit 5y ago
>especially the principle where HTTP traffic is initiated if and only if carried out in response to direct user interaction. How do you propose notifications for new YouTube videos or tweets to work then?
- Minor49er 5y ago
  I'd imagine that the user could toggle a setting to connect to those things on startup if they wanted them.
- tannhaeuser 5y ago
  Don't know, but I think one part of the solutions is to drastically simplify the web stack and separate essential (content-oriented) from incidental (app) tasks. Do yt, twitter really have to live in the browser?
  - charcircuit 5y ago
    The web is an application platform. So it makes sense that yt and twitter live in the browser.
- pavlus 5y ago
  I hope they won't. All notifications I need and even more I get from my phone. I hate to ignore multiple notifications for the same event from multiple devices, I'd prefer to ignore it only once.
Yaina 5y ago
This makes it sound like these initial connections are there to earn Mozilla money. Updating certificate lists, checking for updates, that's all just housekeeping stuff. I also find it very strange that so many people here disable telemetry. Really weakens complaints about removed features, if you're disabling the primary way that shows you're using it.
- grubsong 5y ago
  This comment is a deathflag which you should become attuned to, so you can stay ahead of the curve. Telemetry driven catabolism is a feedback loop which can not be halted once it's begun. What's happening under the surface is that the project has reached the maximum complexity it ever can, after which it collapses being unable to maintain even low-maintanance features, let alone add new ones. Complexity unlike funding is fundamental, and just throwing money at it will not halt the process. Seeing rude obstructionist PR types showing up on bugzilla was the first outward facing symptom there was a cultural problem driven by an underlying material problem. An insider could probably tell you an even earlier warning sign. As the project collapses it will grow tumors (eg Pocket). Totally random pieces of junk code which don't coherently belong to the base project. In the terminal stage it loses its ability to even remove features, or bolt on tumors. Tweaking the logo, churning the UI, and redesigning the website are the only actions the zombie project is physically able to take. So that's what it does.

endgame 5y ago

What if - and bear with me here - Mozilla set up a way for us to fund Firefox directly?

fredoliveira 5y ago
Shocking idea in 2022. No, but seriously, Mozilla — I'll pay you real dollars for this.
- leeoniya 5y ago
  too late for me. they fired a ton of engineering talent working on exciting tech (servo) to chase some bundled vpn rebrand. what a misguided move, like most everything they've done in non-engineering space. sad. before, i would have donated hundreds or more if there was a way to pay directly for firefox and thunderbird. but not anymore. at least the CEO's salary keeps going up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563698
  - shubhamkrm 5y ago
    There's a way to directly donate to Thunderbird: https://give.thunderbird.net/en-US/ https://give.thunderbird.net/en-US/ Unfortunately, there's no such option for Firefox.
    - endgame 5y ago
      At this point, I'm starting to wonder whether or not Mozilla leadership is controlled opposition.
      - lmm 5y ago
        I don't doubt the sincerity of the individuals involved, but Google wouldn't pay Mozilla if they didn't think it was in their interests to do so.
      - wyclif 5y ago
        It is controlled opposition. And their CEO is not an engineer and has no clue how to manage engineers or run a software company; she's a lawyer.
      - yownie 5y ago
        "Never attribute to Malice which can be explained by Stupidity"
jdlshore 5y ago
They have—it’s their VPN offering. (Cue complaints about it not being the right way to fund Firefox, because it’s not a pure donation. Before you go down that road, tell me: what evidence do you have that pure donations would get enough transactions to be worth the overhead? Have they ever worked at scale for any other software?)
- fredoliveira 5y ago
  Their business model doesn't have to be donation-based. It can be, (surprise!) purchase based. I pay for lots of software I use, and do so happily if it delivers value — it would be extremely easy for me to justify paying for what's probably one of the apps I use the most. Why can't we pay for good browsers, that put the focus squarely on being the best tool to access the www? Why can't that money be used to hire back some of the talent Mozilla has been letting go? I say it elsewhere in this thread — Mozilla should let us pay for the bloody thing.
  - Shared404 5y ago
    I would pay for a "Firefox Pro" which allowed greater control/modifications for power users. Make it open source, but have the official download for builds (and source code?[0]) be payed. Bonus points if the download bundle includes source code and a simplified build process. [0] obviously it'll be mirrored in 2 seconds, but still.
    - chii 5y ago
      the few people who might pay for a firefox pro would probably not even pay the wages of the people required to setup the payment and infrastructure therein. Might as well just ask for donations.
    - shrikant 5y ago
      I wonder if they could do a "pay what you want" download page for Firefox Developer Edition. It's my daily driver, and I'd be happy to pay for it.
Groxx 5y ago
You have been able to for a very long time, quite possibly for all of its existence: https://donate.mozilla.org/ https://donate.mozilla.org/
- endgame 5y ago
  People always post this in reply. I don't want to donate to the Mozilla Foundation's CEO salary package, or their navel-gazing side projects, or their endless reshuffling of deckchairs. I want to fund _Firefox_, the only browser engine keeping us from an endless monopoly of Chrome reskins.
  - fabrice_d 5y ago
    So you need to fund either individual developers or a 3rd party like Igalia to develop the features you want, including the work to ensure it will end up in the upstream repo and not in a fork.
  - Groxx 5y ago
    Since that's "a donation with restrictions", you can probably set up a grant / anything with a contract instead. It may be onerous for an individual, but get enough people to be worth the effort and it should work fine.
- hnaccount141 5y ago
  Donations to the Mozilla Foundation support the Foundation's outreach and education efforts, not Firefox development. Firefox is developed by the Mozilla Corporation, which is a for-profit entity owned by the Foundation and is not donation-supported. See the sections "How will my donation be used?" and "Don’t Mozilla products, like Firefox, earn income?" here: https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/faq/#item_8 https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/faq/#item_8
- dorgo 5y ago
  As far as I remember the problem was that you can donate to Mozilla foundation, but not the Mozilla corporation ( which is responsible for Firefox + other stuff ). There is no direct way to finance/donate for Firefox developement (without other projects).
xeromal 5y ago
Several thousand people would donate. Several million wouldn't care. Chrome wins.
michaelje 5y ago
But eventually the “need” for never-ending growth means a manager somewhere will be looking to eek out that x% growth - and their individual (professional) needs will lead to suggesting monetizing the paid user base…
- josephg 5y ago
  Why would this be a default, or an inevitability? Sounds like a reasonable incentive structure for VC-funded companies looking to be a unicorn. But it’s far from the only option culturally. It certainly doesn’t seem like the sort of thing that makes sense for Mozilla.

charcircuit 5y ago

>especially the principle where HTTP traffic is initiated if and only if carried out in response to direct user interaction. How do you propose notifications for new YouTube videos or tweets to work then?

Minor49er 5y ago
I'd imagine that the user could toggle a setting to connect to those things on startup if they wanted them.
tannhaeuser 5y ago
Don't know, but I think one part of the solutions is to drastically simplify the web stack and separate essential (content-oriented) from incidental (app) tasks. Do yt, twitter really have to live in the browser?
- charcircuit 5y ago
  The web is an application platform. So it makes sense that yt and twitter live in the browser.
pavlus 5y ago
I hope they won't. All notifications I need and even more I get from my phone. I hate to ignore multiple notifications for the same event from multiple devices, I'd prefer to ignore it only once.

Yaina 5y ago

This makes it sound like these initial connections are there to earn Mozilla money. Updating certificate lists, checking for updates, that's all just housekeeping stuff. I also find it very strange that so many people here disable telemetry. Really weakens complaints about removed features, if you're disabling the primary way that shows you're using it.

grubsong 5y ago
This comment is a deathflag which you should become attuned to, so you can stay ahead of the curve. Telemetry driven catabolism is a feedback loop which can not be halted once it's begun. What's happening under the surface is that the project has reached the maximum complexity it ever can, after which it collapses being unable to maintain even low-maintanance features, let alone add new ones. Complexity unlike funding is fundamental, and just throwing money at it will not halt the process. Seeing rude obstructionist PR types showing up on bugzilla was the first outward facing symptom there was a cultural problem driven by an underlying material problem. An insider could probably tell you an even earlier warning sign. As the project collapses it will grow tumors (eg Pocket). Totally random pieces of junk code which don't coherently belong to the base project. In the terminal stage it loses its ability to even remove features, or bolt on tumors. Tweaking the logo, churning the UI, and redesigning the website are the only actions the zombie project is physically able to take. So that's what it does.