Attached: 2 images
I have no idea why people use #Chrome. #Firefox looks so much better, and their theme actually works! Even their hidden compact theme looks perfect, the padding around elements is always the same... meanwhile Chromium uses tons of different shapes and they are all incoherent and the padding is off.
Apart from the fact that Firefox is #efficient has core components rewritten in #rust and supports #wayland for way longer.
#Librewolf is a perfect addition to Firefox, I highly recommend to use it!
A little admiration of how easy UI customization is on Firefox, and how shitty Chromium looks.
Firefox is better than most, no double there, but at the same time they do have some shady finances
So I went ahead and read that article and goodness gracious, does anybody actually read these links??? Because that link is a complete nothingburger. It’s a blog post from someone who never read a 990 before (standard nonprofit disclosure form) who thinks every other line of is proof of a scandal. But it’s not, it’s just a big word salad that is too long to read, so nobody will bother.
The most significant charge is (1) that the CEO makes too much and (2) the author doesn’t like that they contract out work to consultants who think diversity is good. And everything after that is LESS significant.
Every point made, so far as I can tell:
Have assets worth $1.1 billion as of 2021
Mozilla spent less on “expenses” from 2021 relative to 2020
Revenue went up over the same time
A lot of revenue was from royalties (e.g. agreements for default search)
They disagree with the wording on a donate form about whether Mozilla “relies” on individual donations
The CEO made $5.6MM
They pulled out one expense, which appears to have been training/education relating to social justice topics
They pull out a few more individual expenses and weren’t sure what they were.
This isn’t secret documents being handed to Deep Throat in a dark parking lot. There’s no smoking gun, no smoke, just a PDF with ordinary tables of expenses and revenue, and consultants who did diversity training. If that’s shady then, get ready to be mad about every non-profit ever.
So I went ahead and read that article and goodness gracious, does anybody actually read these links??? Because that link is a complete nothingburger. It’s a blog post from someone who never read a 990 before (standard nonprofit disclosure form) who thinks every other line of is proof of a scandal. But it’s not, it’s just a big word salad that is too long to read, so nobody will bother.
The most significant charge is (1) that the CEO makes too much and (2) the author doesn’t like that they contract out work to consultants who think diversity is good. And everything after that is LESS significant.
Every point made, so far as I can tell:
This isn’t secret documents being handed to Deep Throat in a dark parking lot. There’s no smoking gun, no smoke, just a PDF with ordinary tables of expenses and revenue, and consultants who did diversity training. If that’s shady then, get ready to be mad about every non-profit ever.
Only in the USA a “non profits” turns profit. 😂
Pretty sure all non-profits strive to be cash flow positive, in the United States and otherwise.
There is a distinct type called a not-for-profit.
Should Mozilla be a not-for-profit instead? Trying to figure out the upshot of that distinction as it relates to this thread.
No of course not. It’s for very limited businesses like clubs. Obviously you can’t grow or really make products under that structure.
It was just a fun fact they do exist.