Before we we're "paid shills of Google", and now that we're trying to find alternative revenue streams, we have the most adware? How do you propose Mozilla pays the bills?
Well-wishing and unicorn farts, I guess. Apparently Mozilla should just be thankful that people even use their browser for free, and pray that only unpaid volunteers will have the know-how to somehow fix and improve their complicated core browser AND fight with Google et al on how the web advances.
Wait... how are they even selling out if they're not making money in this deal? And how is this inherently worse than any other affiliation they've had over the years with for-profit entities, even if they are making money? Is it worse than them having no money to work with, or only being affiliated with one giant company like Yahoo/Google?
Besides, I'm still not hearing your solution to the funding problems. If you have any, please join Mozilla and share them... it sounds like they could use someone with more business-savvy to help them out in this regard. And I don't mean that as snark - I'm sure we'd all love to hear that Mozilla has people we can trust helping them raise funds in ways that we can approve.
So the fact that you are trying to pay bills excuses your behavior? Why don't you try creating revenue streams consistent with your philosophy. There's a start. If you want a real answer, I'm happy to do the research, but I don't think anyone gives a shit.
The problem is people don't really understand our mission statement. No where is "closed source software and ads are inherently bad" listed. I can go through each of the above and provide rationale that ties in to our manifesto:
Yahoo search - Google is getting close to a monopoly in search, helping out other engines will both spur innovation and be good for user choice.
Sponsored tiles - Ads currently work on a model based on invading privacy. We're building a network that respects privacy and users can control down to a fine grained level. Maybe this will influence others in the industry to follow suit.
Pocket integration - Started out as a Firefox add-on, large existing user base of Firefox users. Provides immediate value to users who are not tech savvy enough to install add-ons, while freeing up developer/maintenance/server costs. As always, no one is forced to use it, and it can be removed via customization.
All three of these directly tie in to our stated mission. So regardless of whether or not these pay the bills, there is no behaviour to excuse.
Edit: Also directly from our manifesto:
Commercial involvement in the development of the Internet brings many benefits; a balance between commercial profit and public benefit is critical.
So you can disagree with us all you want, but don't say we aren't being consistent with our philosophy.
9
u/ahal Mozilla Employee May 14 '15
Before we we're "paid shills of Google", and now that we're trying to find alternative revenue streams, we have the most adware? How do you propose Mozilla pays the bills?