4 ms·
It's not really a "both sides" thing given the scale difference between what Google is up to and that.
by stuaxo 8d ago
It's not really a "both sides" thing given the scale difference between what Google is up to and that.
- cecexacjrgec 8d agoNo one is forcing Mozilla’s hand (afaik) and no one is actually thinking “if Firefox had a chatbot that might convince me to move over”. Youre right that it is not a “both sides” thing, its a “Mozilla thing”. Through and through.
- mitxela 7d agoSome people are thinking "Firefox doesn't have a chatbot so I'll use chrome" though
- wolrah 7d agoReally? How many people can that possibly be, and how many of those would a reasonably sane developer actually want? If your competition is attracting the worst kind of users, do you really want to get in their way?
- mitxela 7d agoYes you want more users not less. This is business 101. Even business 000. Customers good.
- fragmede 7d agoBusiness 101 is to make sales! Users sometimes represent sales, but not always. That may be business 201 though.
- mitxela 7d agoThis is about market share of a nonprofit - it's users.
- exjejfjeifj 7d agoPrecisely their point: users don’t necessarily mean sales, but they MIGHT bring in donors.
- wolrah 6d agoBusiness 102, something that's obvious to anyone who's ever worked a customer facing job but incredibly elusive to a lot of people who went straight to management, is that some customers are net negatives and you should not cater to them. They have some combination of ignorance, stupidity, and/or malice which results in them costing more employee time and/or "goodwill" than you'll ever make from selling things. Your business is better off not having them, and even better if they go off to inflict themselves on your competition.
- rockskon 7d agoAre any of those people not investors?