jwzJun 22, 2024

Mozilla's Original Sin.

Some will tell you that Mozilla's worst decision was to accept funding from Google, and that may have been the first domino, but I hold that implementing DRM is what doomed them, as it led to their culture of capitulation. It demonstrated that their decisions were the decisions of a *company shipping products*, not those of a non-profit devoted to preserving the open web.

Those are different things and are very much in conflict. [...]
https://jwz.org/b/ykVr

Mozilla's Original Sin

Some will tell you that Mozilla's worst decision was to accept funding from Google, and that may have been the first domino, but I hold that implementing DRM is what doomed them, as it led to their culture of capitulation. It demonstrated that their decisions were the decisions of a company shipping products, not those of a non-profit devoted to preserving the open web. Those are different ...

Show threadFlorian IdelbergerJun 22, 2024
@jwz disagree. I know many ppl that would or could not use Firefox if they hadn’t and like this it’s a viable alternative. What do the gazilion Mozilla/netscape/firefox or chromium forks/alternatives do for the open web because they disable drm or replaced / removed other functionality? Not much.
Show threadJack Coates 🐀Jun 22, 2024
@fl0_id @jwz compromising on principles means you don’t have them. Which means you’re left with no way to distinguish yourself from a crowded marketplace. Which means you’re competing with price. That works poorly when your competitor is a free loss-leader establishing a moat for a different, related business (not even looking at said competitor’s financial ties to Mozilla). So with principles and price off the table, how is it competitive at all? Mild technical differences, and branding. Might as well have folded up shop instead.
Show threadDocRekdJun 23, 2024

@puercomal @fl0_id @jwz well do you think that librewolf has any influence on web standards?

Besides this is the golden solution fallacy, if Mozilla isn't perfect then it's worthless. No matter that they are trying, no matter that even their ad network way more ethical than the competition, no matter all of the way they are improving the web, for the "activists" it would have never been enough. Any misstep, any compromise makes it no different than the multi billion spy corp.

Show threadJack Coates 🐀
@docRekd @fl0_id @jwz i'm not speaking for anyone else. But 1 - late 90’s through the oughts Mozilla was not a rando non-profit, and did have a seat at the table. 2 am I to interpret their principles as principles, or a corporate mission statement? If it’s a principled non-profit org, then compromise isn't okay. If it's a corporation, then just dump the foundation thing and get in there to compete. With the compromise path, they failed at being a non-profit and failed at being a corporation, which leaves them as a finger puppet for the actual players.
Jun 23, 2024 at 10:19pmWeb
Show threadDocRekdJun 23, 2024
@fl0_id @jwz @puercomal
1 as big as mozilla ever was it still wasn't as strong as Big Content
2 Again perfect solution fallacy. You are ignoring all the good work Mozilla is doing instead focusing on their mistakes