Mozilla Introduces Firefox’s First-Ever Terms of Use
-
Idk the CEOs $6mil salary sounds more like malice to me
Need more advertising in Firefox to keep pumping those exec salaries.
-
Need more advertising in Firefox to keep pumping those exec salaries.
Most of their income has come directly from Google, the incumbent browser monopoly. I'm full tin foil hat on this one, Google is pulling the strings here.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I will stick with Firefox for the time being. One must not forget that Firefox provides the basis for all the alternatives listed here. Despite all the controversy surrounding Mozilla, I still think Firefox is the better alternative to Chrome. And I would like to support this at least until there is a truly free browser. My hope is that Ladybird will be a success. However, it will take at least another 1-2 years until development is so far advanced that it can be used as a browser for everyday use.
Until then, I think we should all continue to support Firefox so that it doesn't disappear completely from the market. -
I will stick with Firefox for the time being. One must not forget that Firefox provides the basis for all the alternatives listed here. Despite all the controversy surrounding Mozilla, I still think Firefox is the better alternative to Chrome. And I would like to support this at least until there is a truly free browser. My hope is that Ladybird will be a success. However, it will take at least another 1-2 years until development is so far advanced that it can be used as a browser for everyday use.
Until then, I think we should all continue to support Firefox so that it doesn't disappear completely from the market.I kind of wish browsers would use cooler names, not "ladybird". Look at Brave. Pretty bad browser, surrounded in questionable stuff, but pretty much estabilished userbase nearly instantly, and I feel like much of that success is simply thanks to a catchy name
-
Most of their income has come directly from Google, the incumbent browser monopoly. I'm full tin foil hat on this one, Google is pulling the strings here.
Didn't judge rule that google can no longer pay mozilla?
-
Didn't judge rule that google can no longer pay mozilla?
Yeah you're correct the deal was cut off late last year so it was not renewed for 2025 but it was on the radar for a couple years. It's why the sudden sketchy rush for other sources of income so they can keep going as normal. I did make an edit to my post and changed 'comes' to 'has come'.
It's been set up to fail. Over 80% of their revenue was from that deal and Google could likely dictate whatever they wanted as part of it. That income is the only thing that even allowed for such an insane pay package for their c-suite in the first place, and so the current form of Mozilla is a direct result of all that cash. It's supposed to be a nonprofit and now they're basically in withdrawal because they cannot afford their insane"normal tech company leadership" salaries.
Idk how Mozilla survives this without another sugar daddy, the leadership pay looks like the biggest liability killing the company and they have to willingly give it up before the company goes bankrupt and/or becomes another ad machine.
I would really love for them to drop pocket and all their other stupid shit and just make a browser like they used to. Even just that is a huge undertaking these days though, and that is because of (again) Google's ability to basically dictate web standards. They strung Mozilla along as a pet "look we're not a monopoly" competitor while continuously raising the bar to entry for any competition. I think the antitrust case should have gone after web standards to allow for competition rather than basically cutting off the only real competitor, but that would have been harder to do and the actual case was based specifically on Google's search and ad monopoly rather than the chromium browser monopoly.
-
And that's fine, I'll just use different browsers until they change their stance.
That's very optimistic. Mozilla is not in good shape and the c suite may simply ride their paychecks from the endowment off into the sunset.
-
That's very optimistic. Mozilla is not in good shape and the c suite may simply ride their paychecks from the endowment off into the sunset.
What's optimistic about telling a multi-million dollar company that if they don't operate with principles that I agree with that they won't get my business?
-
Yeah you're correct the deal was cut off late last year so it was not renewed for 2025 but it was on the radar for a couple years. It's why the sudden sketchy rush for other sources of income so they can keep going as normal. I did make an edit to my post and changed 'comes' to 'has come'.
It's been set up to fail. Over 80% of their revenue was from that deal and Google could likely dictate whatever they wanted as part of it. That income is the only thing that even allowed for such an insane pay package for their c-suite in the first place, and so the current form of Mozilla is a direct result of all that cash. It's supposed to be a nonprofit and now they're basically in withdrawal because they cannot afford their insane"normal tech company leadership" salaries.
Idk how Mozilla survives this without another sugar daddy, the leadership pay looks like the biggest liability killing the company and they have to willingly give it up before the company goes bankrupt and/or becomes another ad machine.
I would really love for them to drop pocket and all their other stupid shit and just make a browser like they used to. Even just that is a huge undertaking these days though, and that is because of (again) Google's ability to basically dictate web standards. They strung Mozilla along as a pet "look we're not a monopoly" competitor while continuously raising the bar to entry for any competition. I think the antitrust case should have gone after web standards to allow for competition rather than basically cutting off the only real competitor, but that would have been harder to do and the actual case was based specifically on Google's search and ad monopoly rather than the chromium browser monopoly.
It never actually clicked to me how screwed mozilla is, but your comment made that pretty clear. At this point, to me it seems like the best course of action would be to fully embrace open source and community driven development instead of trying to run it like before, especially if paying wages becomes unsustainable.
-
What's optimistic about telling a multi-million dollar company that if they don't operate with principles that I agree with that they won't get my business?
Mozilla is run by a nonprofit and just lost 80% of its revenue from the Google ad antitrust case. How is your using their browser making them any money? That's literally the rub here. The whole promise of Firefox is that they don't data mine your activities like chromium browsers do and data mining and ads would be the way to make revenue anywhere near on par with what was lost. The CEO gets paid the same either way out of the billion or so that Mozilla has in financial reserve. Firefox keeps losing user base yet the CEO pay keeps going up.
-
It never actually clicked to me how screwed mozilla is, but your comment made that pretty clear. At this point, to me it seems like the best course of action would be to fully embrace open source and community driven development instead of trying to run it like before, especially if paying wages becomes unsustainable.
As of 2023 Mozilla had over 1.3 billion dollars in reserve (thanks Google!). This is not over yet, but it will be drained pretty quickly if they keep treating a nonprofit like a typical silicon valley tech company.
-
System shared this topic on
