5 ms·

> Mozilla is focused on deploying its roughly $1.4 billion worth of reserves to support “mission driven” organizations, according to a new report. > The nonpro

> Mozilla is focused on deploying its roughly $1.4 billion worth of reserves to support “mission driven” organizations, according to a new report. > The nonprofit, also the parent of Firefox, is investing in artificial intelligence startups that are working on safety and governance issues in AI. Why?, they want to go bankrupt?, do they like burning money? I would understand investing in AI Tech... Brilliant if they use Mozilla contributors. I would understand but investing in other startups... with due diligence and something that might make a difference > that are working on safety and governance issues in AI. what... why... what the hell... that's governments job, not mozillas...

sdellis 9mo ago
Except that government, at least in the U.S., is not doing their job. This administration doesn't want to regulate AI.
- noo_u 9mo ago
  Whether or not it is the government's job is to be regulating a specific thing is not as straightforward of an issue as it may seem.
dralley 9mo ago
The charitable entity known as the Mozilla Foundation and the development entity known as the Mozilla Corporation are not the same. Nothing wrong with the foundation doing these things with their spare cash, it literally does not impact Firefox at all.
- dotBen 9mo ago
  The concern, I think, is that their spare cash is dwindling and thus financial prudence might be beneficial - especially for those who rely on the core Mozilla propositions like Firefox.
  - noo_u 9mo ago
    This might be financial prudence of sorts - doesn't something like 80% of their yearly monetary contributions come from Google, particularly for search partnerships? If they are concerned that Google will start paying them less because search has diminishing future returns, diversifying their income sources through investments in AI might be a good idea.
  - input_sh 9mo ago
    > is that their spare cash is dwindling They're an NGO, you can just... look this up, it's public.
    - dotBen 9mo ago
      Sure and my time is limited. The last I heard was that the Google rev-share agreement was on the skids and they stopped developing projects like Thunderbird and Fake Spotter because they were capital constrained. If you know otherwise then you're better informed than I am I guess
  - pseudalopex 9mo ago
    Mozilla's assets increased again in their most recent financial statement.[1] Investing in AI startups will have high risk however. [1] https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Fdn%202024%20-%20AuditedFinancials.pdf https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Fdn%202024%20-%20A...
- poszlem 9mo ago
  That’s one interpretation. Another is that people typically support foundations not simply because they “do good,” but because they advance a specific cause the donor personally values. For example, if I donated to a foundation focused on developing cancer treatments, and that same foundation later shifted its efforts to addressing melting ice caps, I would likely feel frustrated, since that was not the purpose for which I chose to support it, and I don't really care that both actions "do good" in the world.
  - mrandish 9mo ago
    > people typically support foundations While I agree with the general point that non-profit donors have a legitimate interest in the use of funds, in the particular case of the Mozilla Foundation, I believe the vast majority of that money is from placement fees Google paid to be the default search engine in Firefox. As the pay-for-placement market has evolved and Firefox's browser share has fallen, this income has also fallen dramatically. On the general point about non-profit donations, legally non-profit's use of funds are governed by their board of directors and charter, which often are not constrained in ways donors may assume, hence the need for due diligence prior to giving.
    - pseudalopex 9mo ago
      Mozilla Foundation's 2024 revenue was 60% investments, 28% program service revenue, 11% contributions and grants.[1] Most of program service revenue was from Mozilla Corporation. They paid Mozilla Foundation a small part of their revenue for trademark licenses, legal services, and so. And most of Mozilla Corporation's revenue was from Google. [1] https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Foundation_Form_990_2024.pdf https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Foundation_Form_99...
      - mrandish 9mo ago
        Although I haven't looked at the actual reports in a long time, I think that's consistent with my understanding. The Google money (program service revenue) was a much higher percent in the past, creating the $1.4B nest egg. Now the Google money is greatly reduced and the majority of the income is from the nest egg.
- pseudalopex 9mo ago
  Mozilla's AI investment strategy is more than Mozilla Foundation spending spare cash.[1] [1] https://stateof.mozilla.org/ledger/ https://stateof.mozilla.org/ledger/
mrdependable 9mo ago
I assumed they meant data governance.
crystal_revenge 9mo ago
> that's governments job Why do people take these AI "safety" research projects at face value? The real reason you need AI that is "safe" and "governable" is so that when you start having it promote advertisers content or support the current administration, you don't have to worry about it going "off the rails" and promoting a competing product to criticizing the administration. I'm sure plenty of researchers in this space also believe they are working for the good of humanity, but I suspect the real am is much more practical and perfectly aligned with the business interests of all the companies sponsoring this type of work.
- madeofpalk 9mo ago
  Uh, I mean, I think we've seen first hand that generally one aspect of safety we want is to not produce sexualised images of children.
  - js8 9mo ago
    Is it even an attainable goal? It seems an NN with less than say 4 billion parameters will be able to do that. The cost of training will likely go down with more models being available. Unless we lock down the computing for majority of people, I don't see how we can prevent someone creating a CSAM model in their garage. I don't want to see CSAM created, but the totalitarian control required is too much for my taste (and frankly it's preferable for that person to use NN than to go out and hurt actual children). Not to mention even locked down technology is often being abused by the privileged.
    - adrianN 9mo ago
      People can draw naked children with a stick and some dirt. I’m not sure that preventing the creation of fictional csam is the best use of our resources if we want to protect minors from abuse.
      - rainonmoon 9mo ago
        The best use? Probably not. But if I built a website that let people generate extremely convincing unlimited photos of you wearing an SS uniform and forcing your dog to smoke meth and sent them to everyone you’ve ever met, this might seem like a less worthy hill to die on. Or is that just a sticks and dirt thing too?
trolleski 9mo ago
But compromised Mozilla's solution will then be passed as 'independent' so that a corrupt government can accept it without officially kneeling to BigTech. Publicity stunt a'la foundation.
observationist 9mo ago
They want NGO grant money. They look at the latest and greatest buzzwords for government policy spending and tailor their efforts towards acquiring that money, 99% of which will go to salaries and bonuses, 1% of which will be spent on the mission du jour. Mozilla is a deeply corrupt and failed organization.
- rrr_oh_man 9mo ago
  > Mozilla is a deeply corrupt and failed organization. Can you elaborate?
  - observationist 9mo ago
    See: Firefox, management churn, alienation and discarding of community, etc. Some of us who donated money and supported Mozilla and Firefox are deeply, deeply disappointed and disgusted. Principles are meaningless to non-human corporate entities, and I'll never donate to a non-profit, charity, or other institution again for the rest of my life.
    - abnercoimbre 9mo ago
      A great deal of greed exists within many non-profits. (It's frankly obscene when you do your research.) That's not to say some don't serve the public well, but the legal structure of a non-profit isn't by itself enough to deter corruption.
      - joquarky 9mo ago
        I'm sure a lot of shady activity can be found if someone does some kind of bulk analysis on IRS 990 forms.
- anderson10002 9mo ago
  They're already an NGO who gives out grant money. When you say 99% will go to salaries and bonuses, you know all the financials are right there on the page right?
port11 9mo ago
That kind of reserves, invested wisely, would net enough interest to pay for a decently sized team maintaining Firefox and small AI bids. Of course I’m just an idiot on the internet, not the CEO of a behemoth.

sdellis 9mo ago

Except that government, at least in the U.S., is not doing their job. This administration doesn't want to regulate AI.

noo_u 9mo ago
Whether or not it is the government's job is to be regulating a specific thing is not as straightforward of an issue as it may seem.

dralley 9mo ago

The charitable entity known as the Mozilla Foundation and the development entity known as the Mozilla Corporation are not the same. Nothing wrong with the foundation doing these things with their spare cash, it literally does not impact Firefox at all.

dotBen 9mo ago
The concern, I think, is that their spare cash is dwindling and thus financial prudence might be beneficial - especially for those who rely on the core Mozilla propositions like Firefox.
- noo_u 9mo ago
  This might be financial prudence of sorts - doesn't something like 80% of their yearly monetary contributions come from Google, particularly for search partnerships? If they are concerned that Google will start paying them less because search has diminishing future returns, diversifying their income sources through investments in AI might be a good idea.
- input_sh 9mo ago
  > is that their spare cash is dwindling They're an NGO, you can just... look this up, it's public.
  - dotBen 9mo ago
    Sure and my time is limited. The last I heard was that the Google rev-share agreement was on the skids and they stopped developing projects like Thunderbird and Fake Spotter because they were capital constrained. If you know otherwise then you're better informed than I am I guess
- pseudalopex 9mo ago
  Mozilla's assets increased again in their most recent financial statement.[1] Investing in AI startups will have high risk however. [1] https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Fdn%202024%20-%20AuditedFinancials.pdf https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Fdn%202024%20-%20A...
poszlem 9mo ago
That’s one interpretation. Another is that people typically support foundations not simply because they “do good,” but because they advance a specific cause the donor personally values. For example, if I donated to a foundation focused on developing cancer treatments, and that same foundation later shifted its efforts to addressing melting ice caps, I would likely feel frustrated, since that was not the purpose for which I chose to support it, and I don't really care that both actions "do good" in the world.
- mrandish 9mo ago
  > people typically support foundations While I agree with the general point that non-profit donors have a legitimate interest in the use of funds, in the particular case of the Mozilla Foundation, I believe the vast majority of that money is from placement fees Google paid to be the default search engine in Firefox. As the pay-for-placement market has evolved and Firefox's browser share has fallen, this income has also fallen dramatically. On the general point about non-profit donations, legally non-profit's use of funds are governed by their board of directors and charter, which often are not constrained in ways donors may assume, hence the need for due diligence prior to giving.
  - pseudalopex 9mo ago
    Mozilla Foundation's 2024 revenue was 60% investments, 28% program service revenue, 11% contributions and grants.[1] Most of program service revenue was from Mozilla Corporation. They paid Mozilla Foundation a small part of their revenue for trademark licenses, legal services, and so. And most of Mozilla Corporation's revenue was from Google. [1] https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Foundation_Form_990_2024.pdf https://stateof.mozilla.org/pdf/Mozilla%20Foundation_Form_99...
    - mrandish 9mo ago
      Although I haven't looked at the actual reports in a long time, I think that's consistent with my understanding. The Google money (program service revenue) was a much higher percent in the past, creating the $1.4B nest egg. Now the Google money is greatly reduced and the majority of the income is from the nest egg.
pseudalopex 9mo ago
Mozilla's AI investment strategy is more than Mozilla Foundation spending spare cash.[1] [1] https://stateof.mozilla.org/ledger/ https://stateof.mozilla.org/ledger/

mrdependable 9mo ago

I assumed they meant data governance.

crystal_revenge 9mo ago

> that's governments job Why do people take these AI "safety" research projects at face value? The real reason you need AI that is "safe" and "governable" is so that when you start having it promote advertisers content or support the current administration, you don't have to worry about it going "off the rails" and promoting a competing product to criticizing the administration. I'm sure plenty of researchers in this space also believe they are working for the good of humanity, but I suspect the real am is much more practical and perfectly aligned with the business interests of all the companies sponsoring this type of work.

madeofpalk 9mo ago
Uh, I mean, I think we've seen first hand that generally one aspect of safety we want is to not produce sexualised images of children.
- js8 9mo ago
  Is it even an attainable goal? It seems an NN with less than say 4 billion parameters will be able to do that. The cost of training will likely go down with more models being available. Unless we lock down the computing for majority of people, I don't see how we can prevent someone creating a CSAM model in their garage. I don't want to see CSAM created, but the totalitarian control required is too much for my taste (and frankly it's preferable for that person to use NN than to go out and hurt actual children). Not to mention even locked down technology is often being abused by the privileged.
  - adrianN 9mo ago
    People can draw naked children with a stick and some dirt. I’m not sure that preventing the creation of fictional csam is the best use of our resources if we want to protect minors from abuse.
    - rainonmoon 9mo ago
      The best use? Probably not. But if I built a website that let people generate extremely convincing unlimited photos of you wearing an SS uniform and forcing your dog to smoke meth and sent them to everyone you’ve ever met, this might seem like a less worthy hill to die on. Or is that just a sticks and dirt thing too?

trolleski 9mo ago

But compromised Mozilla's solution will then be passed as 'independent' so that a corrupt government can accept it without officially kneeling to BigTech. Publicity stunt a'la foundation.

observationist 9mo ago

They want NGO grant money. They look at the latest and greatest buzzwords for government policy spending and tailor their efforts towards acquiring that money, 99% of which will go to salaries and bonuses, 1% of which will be spent on the mission du jour. Mozilla is a deeply corrupt and failed organization.

rrr_oh_man 9mo ago
> Mozilla is a deeply corrupt and failed organization. Can you elaborate?
- observationist 9mo ago
  See: Firefox, management churn, alienation and discarding of community, etc. Some of us who donated money and supported Mozilla and Firefox are deeply, deeply disappointed and disgusted. Principles are meaningless to non-human corporate entities, and I'll never donate to a non-profit, charity, or other institution again for the rest of my life.
  - abnercoimbre 9mo ago
    A great deal of greed exists within many non-profits. (It's frankly obscene when you do your research.) That's not to say some don't serve the public well, but the legal structure of a non-profit isn't by itself enough to deter corruption.
    - joquarky 9mo ago
      I'm sure a lot of shady activity can be found if someone does some kind of bulk analysis on IRS 990 forms.
anderson10002 9mo ago
They're already an NGO who gives out grant money. When you say 99% will go to salaries and bonuses, you know all the financials are right there on the page right?

port11 9mo ago

That kind of reserves, invested wisely, would net enough interest to pay for a decently sized team maintaining Firefox and small AI bids. Of course I’m just an idiot on the internet, not the CEO of a behemoth.