3 ms·

It's good that Mozilla is still there to provide an alternative to the proprietary browsers and is fighting for open Internet standards. But the management dire

It's good that Mozilla is still there to provide an alternative to the proprietary browsers and is fighting for open Internet standards. But the management direction and the aggressive political stance it took in the last years is not really good for the project. Also big kudos for Rust, been playing around with it and it really is a great improvement over archaic languages like C or C++.

eimrine 3y ago
I have heard some statements that Rust is bad because of its non-free components such as Cargo.
- Georgelemental 3y ago
  You heard wrong? https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo
  - eimrine 3y ago
    I mean the approval process for packages in Cargo is controlled by vendor.
    - zamadatix 3y ago
      Do you mean the default crates.io registry Cargo uses? Cargo is the package manager, it supports alternative registry definitions and local packages all set in the dependency file. You can run your own private or public registry, or use someone else's, and publish anything you want.
    - margorczynski 3y ago
      By that reasoning almost every Linux distro is also non-free as it uses a default repository for packages.
    - M2Ys4U 3y ago
      One can use cargo without using crates.io, though due to network effects it'd be a pain to do
madeofpalk 3y ago
> It's good that Mozilla is still there to provide an alternative to the proprietary browsers and is fighting for open Internet standards > aggressive political stance These two statements are at odds with each other. Mozilla whole purpose is inherently political.
- Boogie_Man 3y ago
  I think the commenter is referring to the generic "rainbow coalition" language about helping disabled marginalized pregnant women in Africa. I don't think anyone would consider those things as bad, but I can see someone considering them a needless deviation from what (they perceive) Mozilla should be: a FOSS company. It strikes me personally as exceptionally cooperate, which is fine as long as it's not distracting from the core tenants of FOSS. Not everyone can be the FSF.
  - lupusreal 3y ago
    It's not just the 'rainbow' initiatives, but the vague way those initiatives are described. Take this for example: "These projects range from creating virtual support networks for LGBTQI+ individuals" What did they actually do here? Host a mastadon instance for gay people? How many of those people wouldn't have a chatroom with like-minded people if not for Mozilla's efforts? There are countless such spaces on the net already, for instance on traditional social media, on other fediverse instances, on discord or reddit, etc... so how much money did Mozilla spend creating yet another chatroom for LGBTQI+ people and how much real world impact did their effort actually have? (Aside, saying 'individuals' instead of 'people' exemplifies the sort of swarmy weasel language used by cops, corporate PR, and other snakes putting on airs. Why do they do this, don't they know this kind of language betrays them for what they are? I guess they use this language to impress each other and don't really care that normal people perceive it as inauthentic.)
  - jonhohle 3y ago
    Were I a donor to Mozilla, that would tell me they already have more money then they can use toward furthering their goal and in future years I would look to donate directly to organizations helping the impoverished, oppressed. There is no expertise at managing humanitarian efforts at Mozilla. There is no overlap with their primary purpose and external charitable contributions outside of those supporting open web standards. It’s a waste of everyone’s resources.

eimrine 3y ago

I have heard some statements that Rust is bad because of its non-free components such as Cargo.

Georgelemental 3y ago
You heard wrong? https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo
- eimrine 3y ago
  I mean the approval process for packages in Cargo is controlled by vendor.
  - zamadatix 3y ago
    Do you mean the default crates.io registry Cargo uses? Cargo is the package manager, it supports alternative registry definitions and local packages all set in the dependency file. You can run your own private or public registry, or use someone else's, and publish anything you want.
  - margorczynski 3y ago
    By that reasoning almost every Linux distro is also non-free as it uses a default repository for packages.
  - M2Ys4U 3y ago
    One can use cargo without using crates.io, though due to network effects it'd be a pain to do

madeofpalk 3y ago

> It's good that Mozilla is still there to provide an alternative to the proprietary browsers and is fighting for open Internet standards > aggressive political stance These two statements are at odds with each other. Mozilla whole purpose is inherently political.

Boogie_Man 3y ago
I think the commenter is referring to the generic "rainbow coalition" language about helping disabled marginalized pregnant women in Africa. I don't think anyone would consider those things as bad, but I can see someone considering them a needless deviation from what (they perceive) Mozilla should be: a FOSS company. It strikes me personally as exceptionally cooperate, which is fine as long as it's not distracting from the core tenants of FOSS. Not everyone can be the FSF.
- lupusreal 3y ago
  It's not just the 'rainbow' initiatives, but the vague way those initiatives are described. Take this for example: "These projects range from creating virtual support networks for LGBTQI+ individuals" What did they actually do here? Host a mastadon instance for gay people? How many of those people wouldn't have a chatroom with like-minded people if not for Mozilla's efforts? There are countless such spaces on the net already, for instance on traditional social media, on other fediverse instances, on discord or reddit, etc... so how much money did Mozilla spend creating yet another chatroom for LGBTQI+ people and how much real world impact did their effort actually have? (Aside, saying 'individuals' instead of 'people' exemplifies the sort of swarmy weasel language used by cops, corporate PR, and other snakes putting on airs. Why do they do this, don't they know this kind of language betrays them for what they are? I guess they use this language to impress each other and don't really care that normal people perceive it as inauthentic.)
- jonhohle 3y ago
  Were I a donor to Mozilla, that would tell me they already have more money then they can use toward furthering their goal and in future years I would look to donate directly to organizations helping the impoverished, oppressed. There is no expertise at managing humanitarian efforts at Mozilla. There is no overlap with their primary purpose and external charitable contributions outside of those supporting open web standards. It’s a waste of everyone’s resources.