this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
41 points (80.6% liked)
Technology
82488 readers
3691 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What's the financial plan there? Or do you just want them to drop 80% of their budget or whatever it is and work for free?
Back when they were "Netscape" you could buy a box off a shelf with the current version for a flat fee. I'd be okay with a paid version with zero ad inserts, and zero leaky telemetry. I'd even be okay if it was $X for the base product and $Y for $Z years of security updates.
As long as they've got the Point of Sale going for the purchase, if they also want to include addons that I could select to donate to in the same transaction where they pass through those funds to the addon developer, I'd be good with that too.
Netscape went bankrupt so might not be the most solid idea for funding. Wasn't opera paid before too, but abandoned that model?
Netscape went bankrupt when Microsoft started giving out Internet Explorer for free. So, today, would you prefer to use a free Microsoft Edge or would you prefer to pay for Firefox that is telemetry and ad free?
If Netscape had a large paid install base and still failed because a free browser became ubiquitous, what makes you think doing that now when the free browsers are already ubiquitous would work? Especially when it also has to compete with what is essentially already what you're describing, Librewolf (or just Firefox + Arkenfox).
Paying for privacy should be necessary because it's the only way to fund development of the software you rely on. If you're not paying, you're the product.
I pay for email and a handful of other services online. I would be happy to pay for online content if that eliminated ads and tracking. I want to help fund Firefox, but my only option is Mozilla VPN/Relay. Donations don't fund development, and the rest of the paid products have privacy issues. I also have concerns about Mozilla VPN, why wouldn't I just go to Mullvad directly instead of adding another party that can potentially track me?
I'm happy to pay, let me pay.
This is an incredibly myopic statement in this context. In the case of Firefox here, you have total power over your privacy. Don't use the software.
The money to actually create and maintain the product has to come from somewhere. Expecting the software developers at Mozilla to work totally for free is greedy on your part. One way they can pay for the development of Firefox is through selling advertising to users. As long as these advertisements are able to be turned off, I don't have a problem with that (historically they were). Its not my preference, but another way is to sell your activity in some capacity which is what the Telemetry since 2017 has been doing apparently. I don't like that at all. Finally the last way is for the users to pay for it.
Pick one. I pick the one that maintains my privacy and my eyeballs, paying for the product myself. That is why I want that as an option.
Considering about 80% of their budget is paying their CEO there is one way to continue to work with less funding
This ain't it Chief
No it isn't. Not even close.