• Engywuck@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Independently on US laws, It’s funny how people in the technosphere still believe that Mozilla are the good guys.

      • idefix@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t understand your comment. They are the good guys browser-wise but that doesn’t mean they are good guys everywhere.

        • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          They’re not the good guys browser wise, they’re just slightly less shitty than Google, which was (still is probably?) their biggest customer.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            How do you arrive at that conclusion?

            Mozilla has consistently supported user privacy and the open web, which is consistent with their mission statement. They also need to pay the bills, and they’ve done that in a very unobtrusive way. Look at Pocket, which is easy to disable and is reasonably privacy friendly (for what it does). Look at Mozilla VPN, which is just repackaged Mullvad, essentially the gold standard for privacy-friendly VPN.

            Yeah, Mozilla does a lot of stuff I disagree with and I’d run it differently, but I think they do enough good that they’re on the good end of the spectrum. Using Firefox isn’t the lesser of evils, it’s a decent option among good options. Maybe it’s not the best for you, but it’s pretty good.

      • thepreciousboar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        We need to, because they are the only ones fighting against Chrome monopoly. It’s so sad to read news like this

  • Billiam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Yeah, I’m gonna wait a bit before bringing out the pitchforks.

    A plaintiff in a civil suit can allege anything they want, but that doesn’t mean they’re being 100% truthful. Any lawyer will slant the facts as much as possible to make their client look as injured as they can to garner the most sympathy- that’s just lawyering 101. We have his version of events but don’t have Mozilla’s, but the fact that he’s publicly shit-talking the company (rather than let the legal process play out) doesn’t cast him in a good light IMO.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      A plaintiff in a civil suit can allege anything they want, but that doesn’t mean they’re being 100% truthful.

      What do you mean!? Accusation = truth. Where did you go to school?

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        No it doesn’t. Here, let me demonstrate:

        I’m accusing you of showing up to my house and kissing my dog (the gay one, not the straight one.)

        There. Is that the truth? According to you it must be, because

        Accusation = truth

        So because it’s true, I demand you restore my dog’s honor by gay marrying him.

        And that’s literally how it works in the US. You can make any allegation you want when filing a civil suit and a judge must decide the validity of your claims. Teixiera has given his side of the story when he filed suit; that’s all we can say for certain at this point. He could be 100% right, he could be bending the truth a little bit, or he could be completely lying about the whole thing- we don’t currently have any more information than that.

          • Billiam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Poe’s Law is real, lol.

            The worst part is I sat there reading your comment for fifteen minutes thinking, “He can’t be that stupid, can he?” And then I remembered that Trump supporters exist.

    • bean@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Did you read the article? It seems like they had a plan to make him CEO, he got sick, they quickly found an interim CEO, and the moment he got back:

      On the day Teixeira returned to his job, it’s claimed, he was instructed to lead a company-wide layoff of 50 people, 40 of whom were in his MozProd organization.

      Followed by:

      “Mr Teixeira had ethical concerns regarding the layoffs because they were primarily motivated by a desire to increase profit margins at Mozilla, which was already operating at a profit,” the complaint claims. “Mr Teixeira viewed this as antithetical to Mozilla’s values as espoused on their website: ‘We’re backed by a non-profit, which means we prioritize the interests of people first, not corporate profits.’”

      They continue to retaliate against him by denying him bonus, and trying to maneuver him into a demotion. They even had the shitty audacity to say like “well this frees up time for your cancer treatments” which at that point he wasn’t getting anymore.

      The complaint claims that Teixeira, appointed in August 2022, helped reverse the decade-long decline of Firefox, which generates about 90 percent of Mozilla’s revenue and is the company’s only profitable product. He’s further credited with growing Mozilla’s advertising business, and AI capabilities, and with reducing investment in the money-losing Pocket service.

      Sounds to me like they’re just being really shitty to this guy who has done a lot for the company in general and was on his way to CEO before the poor behavior of these two (Chambers and Chehak).