5 ms·

Not sure what I think about charging people to remove this information—are they not also just as bad? This seems like the sort of thing that shouldn't require a

Not sure what I think about charging people to remove this information—are they not also just as bad? This seems like the sort of thing that shouldn't require a victim to pay for, but for law to enforce this not happening. As with for-profit healthcare in the USA, just seems scumbag to profit off of misfortune and misery.

wolverine876 3y ago
In fairness, Mozilla can't make a law.
- hammyhavoc 3y ago
  Sure, but they are also treating it as a business opportunity, just like the people compiling the data are. They should perhaps be pushing on the legal aspect of what's wrong with the situation rather than making money from it.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    You're assuming they are driven by a business opportunity; I have no evidence of their motives (do you?), but another way to see it: There is no law and no prospect of one soon. Mozilla can partially solve the problem by providing the service - I think that's great. Otherwise people would have less recourse. And also, Mozilla must have money to operate; charging for this service seems among the least-bad options.
    - hammyhavoc 3y ago
      Well, we arrive at the whole "the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero" train of thought, otherwise there is no money-making opportunity. They push on the legal aspects of other problems, but I don't see them pushing on the legal aspects of this. Mozilla receives half a billion dollars per year from Google, making up most of their revenue. Mozilla's CEO is also paid millions of dollars each year. If they can't survive as-is whilst paying out those kinds of salaries with such revenue, that's a management problem.
      - wolverine876 3y ago
        > Well, we arrive at the whole "the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero" train of thought, otherwise there is no money-making opportunity. So? Do doctors want you to have cancer? Do undertakers want you to die? Yet they still get paid. > They push on the legal aspects of other problems, but I don't see them pushing on the legal aspects of this. That's not persuasive, unless you are in that business. Where is a list of the things they do? > If they can't survive as-is whilst paying out those kinds of salaries with such revenue, that's a management problem. While I don't like the CEO's pay, competitors have far greater budgets - and pay CEOs far more - as do many businesses. The amount itself isn't evidence. Where is the evidence that Mozilla isn't allocating funds well?
- Vinnl 3y ago
  We do also lobby for better legislation. And from what I've heard (I'm not personally involved with that works), our being present in the market does help us wield influence with legislators.

wolverine876 3y ago

In fairness, Mozilla can't make a law.

hammyhavoc 3y ago
Sure, but they are also treating it as a business opportunity, just like the people compiling the data are. They should perhaps be pushing on the legal aspect of what's wrong with the situation rather than making money from it.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  You're assuming they are driven by a business opportunity; I have no evidence of their motives (do you?), but another way to see it: There is no law and no prospect of one soon. Mozilla can partially solve the problem by providing the service - I think that's great. Otherwise people would have less recourse. And also, Mozilla must have money to operate; charging for this service seems among the least-bad options.
  - hammyhavoc 3y ago
    Well, we arrive at the whole "the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero" train of thought, otherwise there is no money-making opportunity. They push on the legal aspects of other problems, but I don't see them pushing on the legal aspects of this. Mozilla receives half a billion dollars per year from Google, making up most of their revenue. Mozilla's CEO is also paid millions of dollars each year. If they can't survive as-is whilst paying out those kinds of salaries with such revenue, that's a management problem.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      > Well, we arrive at the whole "the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero" train of thought, otherwise there is no money-making opportunity. So? Do doctors want you to have cancer? Do undertakers want you to die? Yet they still get paid. > They push on the legal aspects of other problems, but I don't see them pushing on the legal aspects of this. That's not persuasive, unless you are in that business. Where is a list of the things they do? > If they can't survive as-is whilst paying out those kinds of salaries with such revenue, that's a management problem. While I don't like the CEO's pay, competitors have far greater budgets - and pay CEOs far more - as do many businesses. The amount itself isn't evidence. Where is the evidence that Mozilla isn't allocating funds well?
Vinnl 3y ago
We do also lobby for better legislation. And from what I've heard (I'm not personally involved with that works), our being present in the market does help us wield influence with legislators.