Most active commenters
  • afavour(3)

←back to thread

Let me pay for Firefox

(discourse.mozilla.org)
803 points csmantle | 16 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
gr4vityWall ◴[] No.44549048[source]
I used to want to donate to Mozilla Foundation, but I've long lost any hope that the corporation would spend that money in a way that makes sense to me. The pessimist on me would expect donated money to be spent on more built-in "campaigns", "studies" or ads. Or maybe a bonus for their executives.

I just want Firefox to be faster. I'm donating to Floorp (a Firefox fork), at least they seem focused on making the browser better.

replies(21): >>44549113 #>>44549167 #>>44549236 #>>44549241 #>>44549326 #>>44549407 #>>44549438 #>>44549518 #>>44549541 #>>44549713 #>>44549720 #>>44549848 #>>44550129 #>>44550186 #>>44550236 #>>44550963 #>>44551035 #>>44552251 #>>44552725 #>>44553787 #>>44554444 #
Uehreka ◴[] No.44549541[source]
I get why people are pissed at Mozilla, but I do feel like people on HN also underestimate how much hating Mozilla is becoming a hacker tribal signifier. It almost feel like each commenter is competing to out-hate the others or to add a layer of “in fact its so bad that we should (consequences)”.

Like, in general, I find that any HN thread where most of the comments are just agreeing, one-upping and yes-anding while invoking the same talking points and terminology (CEO ghouls, etc.) is probably a topic we might need to chill out on.

replies(22): >>44549569 #>>44549570 #>>44549593 #>>44549647 #>>44549652 #>>44549739 #>>44550040 #>>44550191 #>>44550364 #>>44550420 #>>44550422 #>>44550443 #>>44550471 #>>44550686 #>>44550727 #>>44550871 #>>44551243 #>>44552259 #>>44555879 #>>44556225 #>>44563570 #>>44566848 #
ericpauley ◴[] No.44549647{3}[source]
Completely agree. For all the hate Mozilla gets on HN, I’ve been using Firefox every day for a decade and it pretty much just works, supports a rich collection of (vetted!) extensions, and performs exceptionally well with sometimes hundreds of tabs.

Mozilla makes mistakes just like any organization but they’ve done and continue to do more for an open Internet than most.

replies(8): >>44549741 #>>44549858 #>>44549891 #>>44550665 #>>44551031 #>>44553229 #>>44555863 #>>44556993 #
WhyNotHugo ◴[] No.44549741{4}[source]
Firefox works, but it’s got thousands of annoying issues (many of them just paper cuts, but still).

The CEO’s salary is enough to fund >30 extra devs. Imagine how many of those issues could have been ironed out over the years.

replies(4): >>44549794 #>>44549957 #>>44552022 #>>44555826 #
sealeck ◴[] No.44549794{5}[source]
The issue with the salary is not that it costs the same as 30 developers – good leadership can make a difference worth >30 developers over the same timespan (especially in an organisation with 1000s of staff). The problem is that the Mozilla leadership hasn't been great, which makes the high salary especially difficult to defend. It's unclear to me that you need to pay an extremely high salary to get a good Mozilla CEO - something like 2-3x the average staff engineer would make sense.
replies(6): >>44550302 #>>44550366 #>>44550438 #>>44550608 #>>44552337 #>>44553153 #
1. afavour ◴[] No.44550366{6}[source]
> It's unclear to me that you need to pay an extremely high salary to get a good Mozilla CEO - something like 2-3x the average staff engineer would make sense.

By objective measure I’d agree with you but you can’t deny the reality of the job market.

If someone is a truly effective CEO they’d be able to get many, many times more than 2-3x staff engineer salary at pretty much any other company out there.

replies(3): >>44550406 #>>44550431 #>>44550909 #
2. Groxx ◴[] No.44550406[source]
If they're in it for the money, instead of the mission, then I say good riddance. That's how we get where we are now.

2-3x staff engineer pay is a LOT of money. More than enough.

replies(1): >>44550501 #
3. wkat4242 ◴[] No.44550431[source]
But they're not. Firefox market share has tumbled and I'm getting more and more captchas because my browser is now so rare it's considered "suspicious". It's not a flaw in the product itself but it does affect its usability. Marketshare of at least 5-10% is crucial to be on the radar of web devs. Especially because the competition besides Safari is basically all one single browser because they share the engine.
replies(4): >>44550511 #>>44551912 #>>44559872 #>>44578373 #
4. afavour ◴[] No.44550501[source]
I disagree, hiring a CEO for well below market pay because they believe in the mission is a recipe for disaster. Very likely you’ll end up with someone whose heart is in the right place but can’t execute.

2-3x staff engineer salary is a lot of money. But no matter how much I believed in a mission if I could make 10-20x that and set myself up for life financially I’d have a very hard time turning it down.

replies(4): >>44550593 #>>44551872 #>>44552151 #>>44552486 #
5. afavour ◴[] No.44550511[source]
There’s a difference in arguing that Mozilla should pay market rate for a CEO and arguing that the current CEO is worth market rate. I’m arguing the former, not the latter.
6. Groxx ◴[] No.44550593{3}[source]
As opposed to now, where you've got someone who is willing and able to tank the entire project, but it looks good on paper? Is that the kind of person you want to be competing for?

I get what you're saying, but I really can't agree. The mission is important in a non-profit. It's part of what makes them work.

7. sealeck ◴[] No.44550909[source]
I think there is a small set of people who would do a good job running Mozilla. Of these people, a very large chunk would do this for $500k annually (this is still enough money for almost anyone to lead a very comfortable life). Being money-driven might make you _worse_ as Mozilla CEO.
replies(1): >>44551968 #
8. MangoToupe ◴[] No.44551872{3}[source]
It's not clear CEO pay is driven my market forces at all. Pay seems almost completely divorced from competency.
9. dimmke ◴[] No.44551912[source]
Idk I switched to Firefox earlier this year and it's honestly been really painless. Not sure why a CAPTCHA would trigger based on browser ID when those are so easily spoofed. Why would someone be running a bot on a less popular browser? I have not noticed any change.

The one thing I do notice is that on some very poorly built websites there will be a bug and it's because they haven't checked in Firefox or because I am blocking things that are no longer blockable on Chrome, but this is rare.

replies(1): >>44555815 #
10. bobbob27 ◴[] No.44551968[source]
Great point. A company that needs to be steered by morality needs leadership that is willing to take the helm because their values align.
11. bobbob27 ◴[] No.44552151{3}[source]
There's people in the FOSS realm running VERY competent operations for simple living wage, or less.

Take KDE for example. It's easy to argue they've accomplished MORE than Mozilla has in the last decade.

Their desktop ships with every Steam Deck (along with some niche laptop manufacturers) and they have a vast ecosystem of applications. Albeit some more rapidly developed than others.

Their structure is entirely different than Mozilla so it's hardly a direct comparison. But the main point is that Mozilla's traditional corporate structure seems to be a millstone.

They could have stashed most of their Google funding and kept a solid team of passionate maintainers paid in perpetuity. Goodwill could have volunteers contributing directly to Firefox, instead of forking it.

12. triceratops ◴[] No.44552486{3}[source]
> Very likely you’ll end up with someone whose heart is in the right place but can’t execute.

There's no reason to believe that. But it's still better than someone whose heart isn't in the right place and can't execute.

replies(1): >>44552667 #
13. rafabulsing ◴[] No.44552667{4}[source]
Or, arguably even worse, someone whose heart isn't in the right place and can execute.
14. wkat4242 ◴[] No.44555815{3}[source]
For me it's those horrible cloudflare and recaptcha things. I get them soooo much. And also that stupid cloudflare "We're checking if you're human" page.

I am on Linux though. Perhaps Firefox on Windows or Mac fares better. But these problems are from the last year or two and don't happen in chromium also on Linux.

15. LtWorf ◴[] No.44559872[source]
> my browser is now so rare it's considered "suspicious".

thanks to AI crawlers, every browser is now considered suspicious

16. anonnon ◴[] No.44578373[source]
> my browser is now so rare it's considered "suspicious".

I've noticed this as well. Also some banking sites don't even work with it anymore.