Mozilla to DOJ: Please keep allowing Google Monopoly default engine payments, so they can keep paying us.

it's not a shitty take; google signed a contract with mozilla and google should have to honour it.
if you want mozilla to be less reliant on outside income... DONATE TO THEM.

It really is a shitty take. Mozilla are essentially saying they depend on Google remaining a monopoly; and that we shouldn't fight the bad guys because the bad guys might hurt us if we try.
The Mozilla blog post was all about the DOJ asking to end search-bar payments, and how this might hurt independent browser. But I saw no mention of the DOJ saying that Google must sell Chrome; which I think is very relevant to the discussion about browser dominance.
More and more I believe that Mozilla's current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.
- More and more I believe that Mozilla's current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.
  I think the salary alone is enough evidence of that. There's a point, specifics of which will depend on your living situation, at which wanting a higher salary requires the same infinite greed that becoming a billionaire requires. And I'm very sure that this point is far below 1 million dollars a year. Mozilla's CEO makes over 6 million.
  If you feel like you deserve that, you are not fit to lead a nonprofit. You have already proven that you care more about giving yourself obscene wealth than about the benefit of others.
  
  And I'm very sure that this point is far below 1 million dollars a year.
  Personally I place the amount around 600,000. Rich enough for anything reasonable.

Maybe making a browser doesn't need to be so damn expensive. Let the web standards freeze so we aren't constantly chasing shiny things. The browser is in a really good spot today. What else does it need to be?
- A non-exhaustive list:
  creating a webpage has gotten too complicated and time-consuming
  accessibility, light/dark, should be a browser-feature, not something each.single.webpage has to implement
  monetization is an ongoing issue
  browsers need to do too much, are too complex and monolitic
  lots of duplication of software/system tasks in the browser, like process/memeory-management. But on webpage-side too, like video player, see point 1 and 2. Called inner-platform effect
- There's a ton of stuff I still want to be supported, especially web assembly.
  But for most things, yeah, we could probably slow down a bit.

Hardly surprising, looking at how many former google and Facebook employees are in Mozilla’s management.

Libre Wolf isn’t bad.
- Can that continue to function if Firefox dies? Like, is it independent to where it will develop web platform features on its own?

Does anybody expect them to say anything else? Web engine development is more costly than even OS development, we're talking costs that often run into the hundreds of millions per year – it's virtually impossible to fund unless you're a giant like Google or being funded by someone with very deep pockets, like... er... Google.
Even MS bailed and ceded power to Google, because it simply didn't make financial sense. Apple does it but they're pretty meh in terms of implementing standards and such... there's a reason 3rd party WebKit browsers are rare. They comparatively run it on a shoestring budget, and they're Apple FFS - their wealth is practically limitless!
People aren't going to start paying to use Firefox, and that money needs to come from somewhere. The community rejects giants paying Mozilla (understable sentiment), rejects paying for Firefox (also understandable), and rejects Mozilla selling data (definitely understandable). Some say donations, but be real, that won't make hundreds of millions per year.
What is the solution here? I'm not trying to be contrarian I just don't know what they can actually do. You'd hope that the Linux Foundation or something would chip in, but nope, they help Chromium instead. I worry for the future of web browsers.
That said, I'm also deeply uncomfortable with Google being able to pay to be default search on so many products. It gives them a huge advantage. I don't want them to have that advantage. It's anticompetitive and scummy as fuck.
Mozilla are definitely between a rock and a hard place here. I don't like some of the decisions they make, but damn, I'm not sure I have the smarts to come up with better ones, given the position and market they're in.
- Web engine development is more costly than even OS development
  Unfortunately, many applications that used to be desktop applications in the past are now programs that run in the web browser. It doesn't matter anymore if they are a lot less effective than being native.
  we’re talking costs that often run into the hundreds of millions per year – it’s virtually impossible to fund unless you’re a giant
  That is the problem - the web needs to be a lot simpler, browser development should cost fractions of that. It got unnecessarily, absurdly complex.
  
  SASS has pushed the work their app developers should be doing onto the development teams of web browsers.
- I know I'm in the minority but I would pay yearly to use Firefox. Not sure how much I'd pay, but I am getting into the habit of purchasing software instead of allowing it to purchase me
  
  You can donate to software development freely right now. This and many others developers
  
  Subscribe to their VPN. I don’t use it, but do it to support Firefox
  
  I, too, would pay. Probably $200/year. What I don't know is how much we need to keep up development.
- The correct solution would have been for Mozilla to pursue alternative income a long time ago. Owning a browser gives you a lot of leverage. Instead they made a half-hearted attempt a few years back and half the products failed. I don't know why FF fans were so comfortable holding them as the savior of the web when they were entirely funded by Google.
  And now... well I don't see a way forward either. Maybe it should just die then.
- If I'm correct, the linux foundation took up development of the Servo engine when Mozilla dropped it. So they don't focus entirely on Chromium, and may be the ones to take back after Mozilla for Firefox/Gecko engine if needed (you did not said that ofc, but i think it's important to mention). There's still a long way to go with new engines such as Servo and Ladybird, but that may be good alternatives in the future.
  
  I don't think Mozilla had any involvement in Servo.
- I would legit pay $40+ for Firefox… it’s gotta make and keep some promises around security, compliance, configurablity and compatibility, etc. though. It also needs to be a decently long term purchase. I’m not doing it for every version they release, maybe a lifetime license or at least a 4-6 year cadence if it’s a bit cheaper.
  
  I don't think $40 would support much use time. Maybe yearly would be fair. Idk what kind of money they need but it's clearly a lot.
- Web engine development is more costly than even OS development, we’re talking costs that often run into the hundreds of millions per year
  And then there are heroes we don't deserve, but sorely need: git.sr.ht/~bptato/chawan.
- The solution is for Firefox to die and for all the payments to be paid to Servo instead.
  Servo survived all the problems that got thrown at them without excuses.
  Meanwhile Firefox seem to shot themselves every week by their own choice.
  I mean who the hell thought that integrating AI into Firefox for example is a good idea.
  
  Servo isn’t a functional browser. You’re not comparing apples to apples.
- Why doesn’t Mozilla just fork Chromium? Anything bad sneaks in, they rip it out. New feature? Develop it specifically without paying for the whole browser. From the user’s perspective, very little changes, but cost savings would be massive.
  It would also be a good high profile tab of "bad things Chrome/Chromium is doing"
  EDIT: It would also justify regulating Chromium like a monopoly, though I think that government ship has sailed.
  
  Chromium is code that Mozilla is not familiar with and has a reputation for being poorly documented.
  A fully divergent fork isn't likely to make development any easier for Mozilla. And a soft fork puts them at the whims of Google's development decisions. If Mozilla needs to pivot, joining with WebKit seems the more feasible option, though that would also likely be a battle to keep a Windows port maintained.

Having been a firefox user for a few years now, Screw Mozilla. What a mismanaged shit-show they've become.
I get that browser development costs a ton, and that they're in a shitty position. But to make this ode to stockholm syndrome blog post... what on EARTH?
Best case, Chrome gets split off into a separate organization free of meddling and they can fund themselves with reasonable donations / investments. In reality, I'm sure Google and other advertising companies will try to get into it and buy the behavior they want, like special-interest groups in US politics.
But if Chrome ended up under any organization with reasonable management who wasn't completely beholden to advertisers, I'd switch back to Chrome pretty quickly (assuming the whole Manifest V2/V3 thing got un-fucked).

I mean, I see their point, but it's still a bad take. At the end of the day, this monopoly needs to be broken up. Also, have they tried not hiring a bunch of new executives and capping CEO pay at 300 000?

Mozilla is such a disorganized company. Why wouldn't they find another search engine deal besides Google? It's possible that they could find another deal somewhere, but it seems to me that they don't care — more like they're a controlled competitor. I'm not surprised considering they scrapped their wording regarding privacy, which leads to a lot of ambiguities.
- Google overpays quite a bit so they have a viable competitor to point to for chrome. If the payment tracked FF's usage numbers it would be way lower now. It makes no financial sense for any other search engine to pay that much.
  That's assuming they could even afford it. Most can't
  
  Not to mention a lot of companies are seeing search as a dead end product…
  The problem with Mozilla is that their route back to greatness would require consolidation that cannot and will not happen due to lack of trust and diverging goals.
  Mozilla + Proton + maybe a third party like Kagi for search (though it is api based) as separate but federated organizations is the only rational option for them ever reclaiming what Firefox used to be.
  It feels like the world is too far gone for this to ever happen. Cynicism, pervasive internet and surveillance culture, and apathy just don’t make the world feel like it could go any direction people want anymore. Feels like we know the track for this and any new corporation in tech and the uber etc were the last of the unicorns where we actually bought into tech improving our lives.
  /rant
- Based on nothing, I too am going to assume they haven't tried.

I'm pretty sure that the main reason Google funds Mozilla is to be able to avoid claims of monopoly on browsers. I don't think we can have it both ways.

If anyone else was confused by the typo, difficult > default.
I'm not sure what to think. On one hand, yes, Google is of course slimy. But if Mozilla loses it's big source of funding (and crumbles as a result), that may put things in a worse place?
Then again, it's a shame that the only major competing browser engine is funded by the dominant browser's company. Maybe Mozilla can be fine without it?
- The one good thing I could think of is that Firefox could come under new management. But then again, how that management will be funded I don't know. Likely they will run in to the same problem as Mozilla.

Pathetic.

How is chrome going to be funded if it's broken off?
- Oh no.

I wish there was a better way to do it but sadly right now this is it. If you want independent browsers to continue they need funding from somewhere.
- They can take the salary of the CEO to fund the browser, they can ask for donations that go directly to the browser, they can make subscriptions with useful services. So many ideas that they didn't try in the past 10 years. But it's easier to get free money from Google and do nothing.
  
  I'd love to live in whatever fantasy land selfless compassionate CEO's come from, sadly it's just a fantasy.

honestly I don't see the thing here. unless its about edge being a respin of chrome. all macs come with safari, all windows edge, ironically its a few linux distros that come with chrome while others use a default foss browser. I feel like their biggest monopoly is windows giving up and using their core rather than making their own.

Mozilla has been taken over from within by google parasites...
Frankly its days are numbered and we will need a solution how to keep the engine development going.
- I think they just got too comfortable with the Google money coming in.

Very said it is time for Firefox to go its own way.
- It is Mozilla the non-profit I want gone, along with their wholly owned for profit company that controls firefox.
  
  100%. Firefox would be better off, I suspect, by focusing on the browser, solely, and with a distributed global team that didn’t need a fancy SF office and fancy SF comp packages.

Why the hell would anyone defend Firefox/Mozilla anymore? Why, because they aren't google? That's a weaker argument the more times Mozilla finds ways to distrust their userbase.
- Because they're the only real competition right now.