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?
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.
deleted by creator
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.
Removed by mod
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.
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.