11 ms·

Mozilla is eliminating its advocacy division

236 points by doener 2y ago

Macha 2y ago
A lot of people here will react to the advocacy cuts, and the idea that advocacy make up such a large portion of the workforce. 30 percent seemed like a lot, but I think it's just 30 percent of the foundation's direct staff. I suspect the corporation employs more people than the foundation? So stuff like development is not included in that count. I do wonder if the cuts are because of anticipation of lower search revenue from Google with tech restricting legislation on the horizon and google's focus pivoting to AI.
- gsnedders 2y ago
  > I suspect the corporation employs more people than the foundation? Yes; the corporation is, last I knew, about a thousand, and the foundation about a hundred.
- mossTechnician 2y ago
  > While Mozilla Foundation declined to quantify the number of people being let go... The Register understands the current headcount is closer to 120, so presumably around 36 people stand to lose their jobs. Compared to their other investments, how much money are they actually saving by doing this?
  - appplication 2y ago
    I think it’s a fair question, but I don’t think it invalidates the validity of looking at this particular division and evaluating if it brings the company more value than it costs. It’s like when I cancel Netflix. Compared to my other spending it’s not a lot, and to be honest I won’t even notice the savings. But if the value isn’t there, why spend money on it? Granted I’m not moralizing about the actual value or correctness of this decision, I know nothing about Mozilla’s inner workings or the work of this division in particular.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
o11c 2y ago
dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867
b59831 2y ago
Hopefully they'll replace them with people who'll make firefox better.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  I doubt it. This company seems to have major structural problems, and cutting some stuff here and there isn't going to fix it. Its expenses are huge, and it pays its executives obscene amounts of money, and meanwhile they've been wasting tons of money on stuff like Pocket, AI crap, and now they're pissing off supporters by getting into ads. I think what we really need is for a new company to get started in some other country, where the cost of living and the cost of executive salaries is much, much cheaper. Have that company fork the Firefox codebase, and then only concentrate on Firefox (Newfox? Betterfox?) browser development and maintenance, and nothing else. They could work more like Wikipedia, just taking donations and building up an endowment with that to fund themselves, and keeping their operations very lean so they don't need that much money to begin with.
  - bawolff 2y ago
    What they should have done was build an endowment when they were getting crazy google money. It obviously wasn't going to last forever.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      Yes, definitely. It would have been easy back then to build an endowment if they hadn't blown money on so much BS and prepared for a future where they wouldn't have all that money coming in. I think it's too late for them now, and I don't see how they can possibly trim things down into a lean, efficient organization, especially not in the US. That's why I think someone in a cheaper country needs to fork the thing and take over Firefox development. This will probably have to wait until Mozilla is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy though.
      - neilv 2y ago
        Why haven't some EU and/or Latin American countries funded a Web browser in a meaningful way, in an effort to be less under the thumb of US tech companies? They could fork Firefox or Chromium, poach some current developers, hire some more, and assert a strong presence on standards.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ChrisArchitect 2y ago
[dupe] Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867
yesbut 2y ago
The workers should fire the execs and convert Mozilla into a democratically controlled worker-owned company.
- Alupis 2y ago
  That is the problem that got them into this situation in the first place. No consistent leadership vision or direction - do everything and anything their staff wanted, almost none of which was actual tech. They hired activists - not technologists. Look at the results.
  - Loughla 2y ago
    What are the results? I can't seem to Google that and get anything meaningful.
    - Alupis 2y ago
      You can google Firefox market share, Thunderbird market share, Mozilla's financial standing over the past two decades, all of their failed social justice endeavors, etc. The company rotted from the inside by allowing the inmates to run the asylum. Now Mozilla is severing the limb responsible for endless side-quests - but probably way too late. FTA: "Fighting for a free and open internet will always be core to our mission, and advocacy continues to be a critical tool in that work. We’re revisiting how we pursue that work, not stopping it" How about you just make the best damn web browser imaginable? One of the most important and influential technology companies ever ate itself into a failed advocacy group with a couple mediocre tech hobbies. What a joke...
      - tcfhgj 2y ago
        > How about you just make the best damn web browser imaginable? Difficult if you compete directly with your main money source
        emmelaich 2y ago
debacle 2y ago
[flagged]
- sherry-sherry 2y ago
  [flagged]
- tcfhgj 2y ago
  Actually, I like woke shit. Lot's of people do better these days thanks to brave woke people.
necovek 2y ago
A job for advocacy division is to, uhm, advocate for the product and mission. We all know how that has worked out in the last decade or so (down to <3% market share from 14% in 2014 and 31% in 2009, though I wonder about absolute numbers as number of Internet users has gone up). It's fine for Mozilla to recognize this as a failed approach (or team), without dropping their mission altogether.
- mmooss 2y ago
  At Mozilla, they advocate for a free and open Internet, user privacy, and more. That's part of the organizations mission. See the OP for more information.
  - stackghost 2y ago
    The Internet has never been less free and open than it is today. Their advocacy has utterly failed.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      > The Internet has never been less free and open than it is today. In what ways? I'd say it was less free and open when Microsoft controlled almost everyone's browsers, when user data was sent in the open (https wasn't standard), .... It was less free and open in early days when users was restricted to specific types of work; for example, I think conducting business wasn't allowed. > Their advocacy has utterly failed. What have they advocated for that has 'utterly failed'?
      - tivert 2y ago
        >> The Internet has never been less free and open than it is today. > In what ways? In the past the internet was a collection of a multitude of relatively open and decentralized sites. Now, it's utterly dominated by a few large platforms, frequently focused on exploiting user data to the fullest. Everything else is pretty marginal.
arunabha 2y ago
Is there an alternative to Firefox that is not controlled by big tech? One of the saddest outcomes of what seems to be the inevitable demise of Firefox would be that there would be no viable alternative to big tech browsers.
- lmm 2y ago
  Konqueror was always the only sensible choice, the only browser built from the ground up as open-source, and still the best I've ever used.
  - jraph 2y ago
    Konqueror is unfortunately not an option anymore when it comes to having an alternative to the big web engines, as it relies on Blink or WebKit now.
    - extraduder_ire 2y ago
      Konqueror has been written in webkit since back when it was called KHTML. It's where apple got the original source code to make Safari.
      - jraph 2y ago
        The KDE folks did some impressive work back then. That the world basically runs on derivatives is quite the achievement. But you can't say anymore that Konqueror is an alternative to big tech. I wish we still had a live khtml developed by KDE today but we don't. We don't have any non big tech alternative today. Firefox is funded by Google. There's hope with servo and ladybug. Netsurf seemed like a very nice codebase but somehow it seems to remain small and too limited for most uses.
  - rpgbr 2y ago
    Konqueror isn’t the main KDE browser anymore. It’s Falkon, and both use QtWebEngine, which is based on Chromium. KHTML is dead AFAIK.
- 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
TwoNineFive 2y ago
They can't be preaching one thing and doing the exact opposite.
zxilly 2y ago
"Fighting for a free and open internet", and got paid by Google. Well, it's really hard.
pyrebrowser 2y ago
Pyre Browser is 44% faster than firefox and our running costs are $20 a month. It reduces global energy consumption by 60tWh and allows free speech across all domains. We dont need an advocacy division - we have already freed the internet!
- getwiththeprog 2y ago
  And you are going to open a casino in 2025! Maybe Mozilla should do that too! (see 'roadmap' at https://pyrebrowser.com/docs https://pyrebrowser.com/docs)
iamleppert 2y ago
Internet is cooked. Shut it down!
autoexec 2y ago
Now Mozilla is an ad-tech company that spies on its users and sells data to marketers so what use is an advocacy team that spreads lies?
coocooroo 2y ago
Doesn’t look like it —https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/open-tech-advocacy-for-a-new-era/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/open-tech-advocacy-fo...

236 points by doener 2y ago

A lot of people here will react to the advocacy cuts, and the idea that advocacy make up such a large portion of the workforce. 30 percent seemed like a lot, but I think it's just 30 percent of the foundation's direct staff. I suspect the corporation employs more people than the foundation? So stuff like development is not included in that count. I do wonder if the cuts are because of anticipation of lower search revenue from Google with tech restricting legislation on the horizon and google's focus pivoting to AI.

gsnedders 2y ago
> I suspect the corporation employs more people than the foundation? Yes; the corporation is, last I knew, about a thousand, and the foundation about a hundred.
mossTechnician 2y ago
> While Mozilla Foundation declined to quantify the number of people being let go... The Register understands the current headcount is closer to 120, so presumably around 36 people stand to lose their jobs. Compared to their other investments, how much money are they actually saving by doing this?
- appplication 2y ago
  I think it’s a fair question, but I don’t think it invalidates the validity of looking at this particular division and evaluating if it brings the company more value than it costs. It’s like when I cancel Netflix. Compared to my other spending it’s not a lot, and to be honest I won’t even notice the savings. But if the value isn’t there, why spend money on it? Granted I’m not moralizing about the actual value or correctness of this decision, I know nothing about Mozilla’s inner workings or the work of this division in particular.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

o11c 2y ago

dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867

b59831 2y ago

Hopefully they'll replace them with people who'll make firefox better.

shiroiushi 2y ago
I doubt it. This company seems to have major structural problems, and cutting some stuff here and there isn't going to fix it. Its expenses are huge, and it pays its executives obscene amounts of money, and meanwhile they've been wasting tons of money on stuff like Pocket, AI crap, and now they're pissing off supporters by getting into ads. I think what we really need is for a new company to get started in some other country, where the cost of living and the cost of executive salaries is much, much cheaper. Have that company fork the Firefox codebase, and then only concentrate on Firefox (Newfox? Betterfox?) browser development and maintenance, and nothing else. They could work more like Wikipedia, just taking donations and building up an endowment with that to fund themselves, and keeping their operations very lean so they don't need that much money to begin with.
- bawolff 2y ago
  What they should have done was build an endowment when they were getting crazy google money. It obviously wasn't going to last forever.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    Yes, definitely. It would have been easy back then to build an endowment if they hadn't blown money on so much BS and prepared for a future where they wouldn't have all that money coming in. I think it's too late for them now, and I don't see how they can possibly trim things down into a lean, efficient organization, especially not in the US. That's why I think someone in a cheaper country needs to fork the thing and take over Firefox development. This will probably have to wait until Mozilla is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy though.
    - neilv 2y ago
      Why haven't some EU and/or Latin American countries funded a Web browser in a meaningful way, in an effort to be less under the thumb of US tech companies? They could fork Firefox or Chromium, poach some current developers, hire some more, and assert a strong presence on standards.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ChrisArchitect 2y ago

[dupe] Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42054867

yesbut 2y ago

The workers should fire the execs and convert Mozilla into a democratically controlled worker-owned company.

Alupis 2y ago
That is the problem that got them into this situation in the first place. No consistent leadership vision or direction - do everything and anything their staff wanted, almost none of which was actual tech. They hired activists - not technologists. Look at the results.
- Loughla 2y ago
  What are the results? I can't seem to Google that and get anything meaningful.
  - Alupis 2y ago
    You can google Firefox market share, Thunderbird market share, Mozilla's financial standing over the past two decades, all of their failed social justice endeavors, etc. The company rotted from the inside by allowing the inmates to run the asylum. Now Mozilla is severing the limb responsible for endless side-quests - but probably way too late. FTA: "Fighting for a free and open internet will always be core to our mission, and advocacy continues to be a critical tool in that work. We’re revisiting how we pursue that work, not stopping it" How about you just make the best damn web browser imaginable? One of the most important and influential technology companies ever ate itself into a failed advocacy group with a couple mediocre tech hobbies. What a joke...
    - tcfhgj 2y ago
      > How about you just make the best damn web browser imaginable? Difficult if you compete directly with your main money source
      - emmelaich 2y ago

debacle 2y ago

[flagged]

sherry-sherry 2y ago
[flagged]
tcfhgj 2y ago
Actually, I like woke shit. Lot's of people do better these days thanks to brave woke people.

necovek 2y ago

A job for advocacy division is to, uhm, advocate for the product and mission. We all know how that has worked out in the last decade or so (down to <3% market share from 14% in 2014 and 31% in 2009, though I wonder about absolute numbers as number of Internet users has gone up). It's fine for Mozilla to recognize this as a failed approach (or team), without dropping their mission altogether.

mmooss 2y ago
At Mozilla, they advocate for a free and open Internet, user privacy, and more. That's part of the organizations mission. See the OP for more information.
- stackghost 2y ago
  The Internet has never been less free and open than it is today. Their advocacy has utterly failed.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > The Internet has never been less free and open than it is today. In what ways? I'd say it was less free and open when Microsoft controlled almost everyone's browsers, when user data was sent in the open (https wasn't standard), .... It was less free and open in early days when users was restricted to specific types of work; for example, I think conducting business wasn't allowed. > Their advocacy has utterly failed. What have they advocated for that has 'utterly failed'?
    - tivert 2y ago
      >> The Internet has never been less free and open than it is today. > In what ways? In the past the internet was a collection of a multitude of relatively open and decentralized sites. Now, it's utterly dominated by a few large platforms, frequently focused on exploiting user data to the fullest. Everything else is pretty marginal.

arunabha 2y ago

Is there an alternative to Firefox that is not controlled by big tech? One of the saddest outcomes of what seems to be the inevitable demise of Firefox would be that there would be no viable alternative to big tech browsers.

lmm 2y ago
Konqueror was always the only sensible choice, the only browser built from the ground up as open-source, and still the best I've ever used.
- jraph 2y ago
  Konqueror is unfortunately not an option anymore when it comes to having an alternative to the big web engines, as it relies on Blink or WebKit now.
  - extraduder_ire 2y ago
    Konqueror has been written in webkit since back when it was called KHTML. It's where apple got the original source code to make Safari.
    - jraph 2y ago
      The KDE folks did some impressive work back then. That the world basically runs on derivatives is quite the achievement. But you can't say anymore that Konqueror is an alternative to big tech. I wish we still had a live khtml developed by KDE today but we don't. We don't have any non big tech alternative today. Firefox is funded by Google. There's hope with servo and ladybug. Netsurf seemed like a very nice codebase but somehow it seems to remain small and too limited for most uses.
- rpgbr 2y ago
  Konqueror isn’t the main KDE browser anymore. It’s Falkon, and both use QtWebEngine, which is based on Chromium. KHTML is dead AFAIK.
2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

TwoNineFive 2y ago

They can't be preaching one thing and doing the exact opposite.

zxilly 2y ago

"Fighting for a free and open internet", and got paid by Google. Well, it's really hard.

pyrebrowser 2y ago

Pyre Browser is 44% faster than firefox and our running costs are $20 a month. It reduces global energy consumption by 60tWh and allows free speech across all domains. We dont need an advocacy division - we have already freed the internet!

getwiththeprog 2y ago
And you are going to open a casino in 2025! Maybe Mozilla should do that too! (see 'roadmap' at https://pyrebrowser.com/docs https://pyrebrowser.com/docs)

iamleppert 2y ago

Internet is cooked. Shut it down!

autoexec 2y ago

Now Mozilla is an ad-tech company that spies on its users and sells data to marketers so what use is an advocacy team that spreads lies?

coocooroo 2y ago

Doesn’t look like it —https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/open-tech-advocacy-for-a-new-era/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/open-tech-advocacy-fo...