I had a look at what it actually does in the Firefox settings and all it seems to do is to disable one AI feature flag, change the default search engine, and then set a few other flags that are changes that you may or may not want to make, unrelated to AI. Not sure you want to run a 3rd party shell script just to do that…
The second sentence in the Getting Started section invites you to follow the manual guides instead of running the 3rd party shell scripts. I think this is a good way to do it -- have both options and tell people about them right at the start of the process. Is there some other way you wish they'd share this info?
Are all options available to the group policy? Since this is not directly modifying your app and merely creating a group policy for the browser to use, there might be some things not able to be set there. I have not experience with these group policies. Just thinking of why something might be missing as you stated. It could also be considered out of scope for the dev making this project.
Seems like this is for the people that need to execute random powershell scripts they don't understand in order to turn of telemetry and copilot on Windows because reading about the registry and group policy is too much for them.
The Getting Started section invites you to follow the manual guides instead of running the scripts. That's what I did, and I really appreciate the site/guides.
Stupid to run random scripts you find online, but browser makers push users into it.
My son wants to eat "Chinese" food with chopsticks, but he can only really use a fork, so we adapt the chopsticks. He'll be able to use them eventually, but not everyone has a) the desire, nor b) the dexterity.
Making it easier to do what users want with a computer without telling them 'just learn to program' (or script in this case) is actually a good thing imo.
Some people want computers, some people just want to use them like appliances. The bigger problem is those companies who want to control other people's computers no matter which type of person they are.
A mobile phone is meant to be used to make and receive telephone calls. That is its raison d'être from the very beginning and why it is called like that.
It... doesn’t? PDAs won, there are nearly no mobile phones being made anymore. The thing you call a mobile phone is a PDA with an incidental value-add of placing phone calls. (I had been wondering for some time why the UX of talking into a headset had been on the decline for the last 20 years until I encountered this idea; sadly, I don’t remember where.)
Seems like you're using your computer wrong by posting here then. In fact, 99% of people are using their computing devices wrong all the time. The computer must be the most misused tool in the world.
With all due respect, I hope you never touch the development of any piece of software any of my relatives or friends ever has to use.
Good UX is one of the most important-yet-underserved areas in the tech industry (the topic of this site), and this sort of attitude goes beyond being smug and naive to being actively harmful. Your goal should always be to make things easier and with as little friction as necessary.
It's not hard to search for a few keys in the about:config menu or to set a group policy. If you can't be bother to do this you have zero business running random scripts that update your system configuration that you have no idea how it works.
Normie users would be better off reading some detailed step-by-step instructions on how to do it by hand using built-in methods than to run random code from the internet that can be malicious.
My mom is 75 years old and barely knows how to use a web browser to begin with. There is zero chance I encourage her to run random pwsh scripts from the internet.
God forbid we're going to start giving them AI agents to do this kind of stuff for them. God help us.
When Mozilla updated Firefox with the AI chatbot feature the first thing I did was look in settings in how to remove it. When that failed I just googled it, which pointed me to about:config and which keys to look for.
Much easier to figure out with your intuition what `browser.ml.chat.enabled` could possibly mean than running pwsh script.
If you're this paranoid then you can't really trust any piece of software. Many "random" shell scripts that update your system config are more well vetted than 90% of the software you run on your computer daily.
You should trust software that you can verify yourself as safe, or software written by people who you trust not to abuse the power you're giving them over your device by allowing them to modify it.
Personally, I don't trust most popular software either, but its easy to see why people would be fooled into thinking that software written by a major corporation used by millions of people might be more trustworthy than a script uploaded by a random anonymous person who couldn't be held accountable if their software infested your system with malware.
I agree. But I'm just surprised that you'd be extremely wary of running a sub 100 line open source script as a one time operation that you can easily audit yourself but on the other hand are likely using a browser that no one in the world (not even the developers) has fully audited.
There are "detailed step-by-step instructions" linked in the second sentence of the Getting Started section. I'm not sure what more you could want, besides perhaps making it more foolproof against people who can't be bothered to read.
Presumably you grow all your own food, cook from scratch; manufacture your own tools; refine your own fuel; mine your own lithium for batteries; produce your own fibres to weave at home, make cloth, which you tailor your own clothes from; grow trees, fell them, cut them to boards, and make your flooring and furniture; and so on?
Otherwise, you're the sort of normie carpenter who doesn't even do their own land clearance ready for seeding. For whom you must express your utmost contempt! /s
They also demonstrated how this could be used to silently find out someone’s phone number and then hijack a TFA validation call from an app like WhatsApp to take over their account with no user interaction.
Right, but isn't it noisy ... at the headphone level? (i.e. not heard when not wearing them?).
What I'm getting at is that I think the risk varies depending on how often you leave the headset paired; for example, if the headphones are over-ear, those are more prone to not be turned off --- and remain connected; thus, a greater chance of success for establishing a BlueTooth classic connection without getting noticed and performing the WhatsApp account take-over until they listen to "I'm gonna take a shower, honey!" in the distance.
How are you expecting to run an entity with developers, support, and operations without any leadership?
I don't know if you have ever worked in a larger team that lacked someone to make decisions, take responsibility and set a strategy, but in my experience that is almost always a disaster.
I'm worked on many larger teams and leadership is independent of compensation.
The fact that "high performance leaders" need to make tens of millions of dollars is one of the greatest lies being told in the modern age.
Right now my chief in the fire company where I volunteer makes the same amount of money I do: $0.00. He is the greatest leader I have ever personally met, and I've been around for a while.
When I was in the Army, my company commander (a Captain) made ~4x what the newest private did. The highest-paid officer makes ~9x.
There are government senior executives and university professors running labs with budgets and teams that make Mozilla look like a lemonade stand for practically nothing.
Mozilla should ask the Linux Foundation what their budget is, what their leadership structure is, and do that.
Mozilla, no matter what they say or think or try, is and will always be a web browser developer. A web browser. Anything else is a side project, a hobby. A distraction. Every single molecule of fuel used by their brains while at work and every single microwatt of power used by their infrastructure should be wholly and aggressively dedicated to building the tools and organization needed to create the best web browser possible.
Bloated payrolls are tolerable if the decisions made are wise, responsibility is taken, and strategies exist and make sense.
Three examples off the top of my head — PostgreSQL, FreeBSD, and Debian — are doing just fine without someone "taking responsibility" (when have Mozilla's CEO ever done that?).
Debian has an elected leader that is not paid and has pretty limited authority overall.
There's also the Linux kernel, with Linus doing both managerial and technical work, running circles around Mozilla's leadership in both. He makes just a few millions per year, less than Baker did even two years ago AFAIK.
I think all of these projects have contributors who are getting paid at other companies for the work, notably Linux. Not quite so for Firefox. I mean, tell me where does Linus get his income? You think that can be fully replicated for Firefox?
> We are a worker-owned, employee-run company with more than 20 years of experience building open source software in a wide range of exciting fields.
If there's enough money to go to the developers actively working on a product to make it sustainable, I think a lot of people would get on board with that and would pay for FF.
> If there's enough money to go to the developers actively working on a product to make it sustainable
That's a big if. AFAIK most open source project developers don't get remotely enough donations to support them working on it full-time. The ones that do are the exception, not the norm.
I’m fine with twice the amount of a developer. Taking into account responsibility, public involvement and special clothing. Travel costs and so on are separate. The developers are doing the hard work.
There is not “team” if a MBA or lawyer gets 38 times the wage of an actual person doing the work.
Worth thinking of it also "the other way". As long as some people (developers) accept an MBA above them getting 38x, without adding much value, this will happen.
I don't personally like it (so generally did not allow to happen to me), but if some people feel "safer" getting lower pay (less chance of getting fired, easier to get re-hired as there are more low paid positions than high paid positions), the natural result is that it will happen.
My experience is that both high and low paid positions are not as "safe" as people think they are (seen multiple changing in various organizations types), so people should care more about finding a reasonable organization.
I think you need a CEO, you just don't need a CEO that is paid $7m/year. That's ludicrous. What amazing decisions have they been making that were worth that amount? Have they really contributed more than a team of 70 developers could?
There are plenty of competent people that could be CEO for far less, like $200k/year.
It doesn't even have to be that. Take that and bump it 5 times like a million dollars. Throw in more cash if they can increase Firefox's market share. Have clauses to penalize anything about opt-out telemetry or anti-privacy features. I'm happy to add more carrots as well as more sticks.
All said and done, that will still be way more reasonable than that ludicrous salary.
I would be fine with $6 million if it was making at least that much more in revenue because of the CEO, but I highly suspect that it is not. I think $600K would be PLENTY and would pull in talented execs and managers.
> don't know if you have ever worked in a larger team that lacked someone to make decisions, take responsibility and set a strategy
I had once. The ultra micro-managing boss went to surgery and was off for two months. The whole company happily cruised along, numbers kept going up, his toxic pressure was absent, people kept working and making things.
I don't know how it would go for long term, but these were some of the best months.
If the CEO changes his salary to 200k then fine I have no problem with that. CEOs are overpaid relative to skill and that does not sit well with my sense of generosity.
It's bizarre. In Japan, the custom is to revere your elders, in the US its apparently whoever is titled "leader". All of HN shivers in exaltation at the mention of the word.
The reality is that Firefox would have done much better had Mozilla fired their CEO 15 years ago and never hired another one. All of them executed significantly worse than mere government bonds did.
Leaving aside the (valid) sibling commenters here pointing out that it can be done well, but you're making a strawman argument - the gp never said anything about eliminating managers or organisational structure.
They specifically targetted two things:
1. directing funding towards Firefox development. Mozilla have been criticised for spending large portions of their income on non-Firefox endeavours while not publishing breakdowns of Firefox-specific spending in their annual reports
2. The CEO's salary: the commenter said nothing about not wanting the CEO position to exist, merely a desire for the funding to the Foundation to not be excessively funnelled into salary increases while the company's resources contract. Which seems reasonable.
CEO is typically needed for-profit purposes on a scale. Donating for devs to build browser without that purpose does not need CEO. Just a lead engineer and accountants.
If dev work is paid for by the community, the CEO payments can increase since the budget of Mozilla will stay the same but now have less cost to carry elsewhere?
Aren't they just piggybacking on Mozilla's work though? The point is to make the work that Mozilla is doing sustainable, not to pay someone else to ship a slightly modified version of it.
Yes, forks do indeed piggyback off of their code; that's the point of free and open source software anyway. And Mozilla, in its current state and current leadership, is not sustainable and still won't be with people paying for Firefox. Its marketshare is dwindling, and people are moving to forks such as Zen or to other browsers like Vivaldi. Adding a paid version will just make that trend go faster. And you don't even need to make a fork, because user.js tweaks such as Arkenfox or Betterfox exist anyway.
The point is that people want to fund the development of the actual browser engine which is more important than the customization scripts that those forks maintain. The engine is what people are worried about.
Or in slightly less fatalistic words: In any entity with more than 1-2 employees you need someone to make decisions and be accountable for them. The normal solution is to have a director/CEO for this. You may be able to get away with paying them slightly less than market rates if they are doing it for a good cause, but if you want someone competent you will need to pay them a relatively high salary to compete with other employers.
Expecting Mozilla to somehow function without a CEO, unlike pretty much every other charity in the world, is just not reasonable.
Interesting article, but picking Johnson and Cummings's handling of Covid as a positive example is a very odd choice, given their falling out and the numerous corruption allegations and parliamentary inquiries into their actions since then.
Surely it is that specific example that counts. It seems perverse to dismiss one sensible decision on the grounds that the persons concerned made many other bad decisions. It's the decision that is the focus not the persons making it.
This is a blind spot. Generally speaking the devs are comparatively well off people and they don't live paycheck-to-paycheck. So by default devs won't even conceive of the difficulties of people who are in fact living paycheck-to-paycheck and have little buffer in their bank accounts. That's the blind spot. They won't know this is a problem unless a good PM tells them about it. Ultimately it is the job of the PM to tell the devs how important (or not) it is to do these optimizations, and how important (or not) it is to test with low-end devices with little RAM or free disk space.
I am pretty well off now but I come from a pretty poor background. I used to have to drive a cheque to my landlord's office when rent was due, during university in the late 2000s
I thought a lot of my fellow devs would be from similar backgrounds, but that is not the case at all mostly. I find a lot of my coworkers come from white collar families, or relatively well off immigrant families and I am the outlier coming from a very blue collar family
It is very common for me to have a very different perspective on things than my coworkers.
Economic background shapes us so much more than people realize
Besides the fact that the story is an example, is fully made up, and you clearly didn't read the actual article: what an incredibly out of touch response.
> I don't set up standing orders, got burned once with unarranged overdraft fees, that wasn't a good month. Better to be late a day or two with rent payment.
Anyway, this same sort of nonsense could also make it very difficult to enroll in autopay, so the main points stand.
reply