5 ms·

Mozilla mentioned their viability in this statement, but one has to wonder how much more viable they’d be had they not wasted tens of millions of dollars on acq

Mozilla mentioned their viability in this statement, but one has to wonder how much more viable they’d be had they not wasted tens of millions of dollars on acquisitions such as this, Pocket, and of course their former CEO’s salary. I would happily donate to a company that focussed on just making Firefox and Thunderbird, but the reason why I don’t and probably will not donate to Mozilla ever again is that I have no idea what hare-brained acquisition they’ll do next. Their mission and plan for the future is so incomprehensible that it’s probably just easier to assume actual malice.

Vegenoid 2y ago
> it’s probably just easier to assume actual malice The easiest assumption to make is greed and foolishness.
- dns_snek 2y ago
  Dishonesty in pursuit of greed equals malice.
mmooss 2y ago
What is their profit or loss from Pocket?
debugnik 2y ago
> but the reason why I don’t and probably will not donate to Mozilla ever again is that I have no idea what hare-brained acquisition they’ll do next. You can't donate to Mozilla Corporation at all, which is the entity maintaining Firefox and running these acquisitions. You can only donate to the Mozilla Foundation, which funds other campaigns.
- gabeio 2y ago
  > You can't donate to Mozilla Corporation at all, which is the entity maintaining Firefox and running these acquisitions. You can only donate to the Mozilla Foundation, which funds other campaigns. The Mozilla Foundation is the parent of the Mozilla Corporation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
  - lolinder 2y ago
    But donations to the Foundation cannot legally be spent on the Corporation's projects, of which Firefox is one.
  - debugnik 2y ago
    Which means the Corporation's profits flow upwards to the Foundation. But donations to the latter can't easily flow downwards to a for-profit.
account42 2y ago
> their former CEO’s salary There is no indicuation that their current leadership salaries is saner and the fact that their only visibile response to the cricism has been to no longer publish saralies it should be assume that it isn't.

Vegenoid 2y ago

> it’s probably just easier to assume actual malice The easiest assumption to make is greed and foolishness.

dns_snek 2y ago
Dishonesty in pursuit of greed equals malice.

mmooss 2y ago

What is their profit or loss from Pocket?

debugnik 2y ago

> but the reason why I don’t and probably will not donate to Mozilla ever again is that I have no idea what hare-brained acquisition they’ll do next. You can't donate to Mozilla Corporation at all, which is the entity maintaining Firefox and running these acquisitions. You can only donate to the Mozilla Foundation, which funds other campaigns.

gabeio 2y ago
> You can't donate to Mozilla Corporation at all, which is the entity maintaining Firefox and running these acquisitions. You can only donate to the Mozilla Foundation, which funds other campaigns. The Mozilla Foundation is the parent of the Mozilla Corporation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
- lolinder 2y ago
  But donations to the Foundation cannot legally be spent on the Corporation's projects, of which Firefox is one.
- debugnik 2y ago
  Which means the Corporation's profits flow upwards to the Foundation. But donations to the latter can't easily flow downwards to a for-profit.

account42 2y ago

> their former CEO’s salary There is no indicuation that their current leadership salaries is saner and the fact that their only visibile response to the cricism has been to no longer publish saralies it should be assume that it isn't.