When vice-presidents of Mozilla were asked, along the years since it was signed, what was the exact content of the contract signed with Google, all of them answered “I don’t know. I havent read it.”

Who in the world read the contract Mozilla and Google signed together?

Who has a single clue of what has been in there? And subsequently how can we trust Mozilla in such conditions? How didn’t it doom itself to never be in a position to compete meaningfully with Chrome, buying itself time and/or a comfortable mattress of $$$?

Who can tell the Google+Mozilla contract DOESNT contain the following:

  • Firefox shall never include adblock technology as a default
  • Firefox shall always “feel lucky” with Google
  • Firefox shall always “phone home” to Google with “safe browsing” etc.

How can we know the billion $$$ of Google didnt serve to make sure that Firefox would never be the browser that th people actually need to protect themselves against… Google?

  • 10_0
    link
    112 years ago
    • “I want my cake and eat to it” -JFK
    • “I pooped my pants” -Taylor Swift
    • “Why should moz pay for something that costs money to make and maintain?” -OP
    • “Who ever uses sources in posts anymore, when its just easier to make up quotes to fillout a nonsense post, while breaking the sublemmies rules.” -me
    • “I know I certainly don’t read the TOS when signing up for Facebook, therefore companies with millions of $$$$$$$$$$ clearly don’t hire a professional lawyer to read the contract, and summarize it for the management.” -OP
    • 10_0
      link
      102 years ago

      Also isn’t Firefox open source? So why not make a post about third party programmers digging into the code, and finding real spyware/telemetry.

      • @obbeel
        link
        22 years ago

        You don’t need spyware to say to your user that accessing websites with self signed certificates is the most dangerous thing possible that could happen to you. Among other measures common in browsers. An option for web browsers outside firefox and chrome that actually run all websites would be good.

      • CHEF-KOCHM
        link
        -62 years ago

        OP asks about the contract between Google and Firefox, the contract is not open source nor leaked, I just checked it.

        • @masu
          link
          10
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          deleted by creator

          • CHEF-KOCHM
            link
            -19
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Says who, you or what, based on what. You speculate something without anything.

            You really think if there is a contract that this influence the source code. I doubt that. Google also releases their source code for apps. Part of their business model, you get free apps and services and in return you get ads, in-app ads etc. Mozilla also had in-app ads btw.

            Down-vote after 2 seconds … childish.

            • @masu
              link
              10
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              deleted by creator

              • CHEF-KOCHM
                link
                -22
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                8 days timeout for you.

                Your own reasons and failed attempt.

                Update

                After the smear campaign you tried to start now, which is against Lemmy Code of Conduct, your ban will be indefinitely. Instead of contacting me via DM, if you think I made a bad judgment call, you decided to start drama.

                My decision to ban trolls is 100 percent justified here.

            • @the_tech_beast
              link
              42 years ago

              Google is primarily an advertising company. The parent company of Google, Alphabet gets more than 80% of revenue from google ads.

              Not all google apps and services are open source. Google collects a lot of data and makes money of it by displaying its users with ads.

              Mozilla’s source of income is primarily from the search deal and not from selling user data.

              • CHEF-KOCHM
                link
                -22 years ago

                Problem with the - not everything is open source - goes vice-versa, see Pocket history. Some Mozilla products also do collect data, so there is no difference here especially when e.g. Firefox also included, multiple times ads in their products. Also nothing says you cannot do OSS or open source it afterwards, again see Pocket.

                Income and the question of OP are different things, he asked if we know that because of income, deals etc this might influence something, which is unclear since there are not enough data provided. Rest is pure speculation without substantial evidence.

                Topic is also primary a trust question and not an incoming question. You only solve trust concerns by showing something, most people here show nothing and defend, which is not the purpose of this community.

          • CHEF-KOCHM
            link
            -32 years ago

            The contract did not got leaked and the article also does not conclude anything, it links to the 250 employee layoff story.

            • @the_tech_beast
              link
              52 years ago

              why does the contract need to be leaked?

              We know the contract is about setting google as the default search engine on all Firefox browsers.

              • CHEF-KOCHM
                link
                -32 years ago

                Actually we know nothing at all, because no one knows the exact terms, the only thing what we know is that people got fired and that the CEO of Mozilla made more money.

                Google and Mozilla will never disclose any details here, so the question stands. Google and Mozilla had btw more than one deal, and they continued their partnership over the years.

                Please give OP also some time to respond, I am not the OP here.

  • @masu
    link
    10
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    deleted by creator

    • @TheAnonymouseJoker
      link
      82 years ago

      This post pretty much violates the conspiracy theory related rules here.

    • @Nyaa
      link
      1
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      deleted by creator

  • CHEF-KOCHM
    link
    -8
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I let this stand because the user does not claim anything here, he asks about transparency between the contract from Google and Mozilla. He clearly indicates this with lots of question marks.

    He does not claim anything. He asks questions. This is legitimate and not against community rules. Conspiracy is not when someone legitimate ask questions, conspiracy also needs minimum 3-5 people, per definition.

    If someone leaks the full contract or has insights please post your findings in here, otherwise this remains how it is.

    Please do not abuse report function.

    Thanks.

    • @pinknoise
      link
      5
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Wtf, I immediately reported this as soon as I saw it because “Joe Bidet” is obviously a troll. Your own rules for this community forbid trolling, hate and conspircy theories.

      • CHEF-KOCHM
        link
        -22 years ago

        User names only do not existentially reflect trolling.

        I do not ban people because user names unless it is offensive, sexual, racist. That would be mod abuse.

        • @pinknoise
          link
          4
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Ok, I just read the drama thread and idk if I want to contribute to that, but I still think this is a bad trolling attempt and that’s not based on the name only. It’s pretty clear why google is keeping mozilla alive and this thread is some conspiracy bullshit you would find in a brave or vivaldi forum.

    • @edward
      link
      4
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      “I’m just asking questions.”

      • CHEF-KOCHM
        link
        -42 years ago

        Welcome to freedom of speech.