Quoting dev (devua...@gmail.com): > So, this[1]? I've honestly never bothered to look until you > mentioned it.
Primarily that, yes. Mozilla Corp. are highly dependent on contractual funding from all of those firms listed, but IIRC the biggest share is from Google, Inc. So, when I've given public lectures about Web browser security and privacy (such as the one I gave in Feb. 2011 at SVLUG, for which slides and lecture notes available from http://www.svlug.org/), I've stressed that, although absolutely nothing about this even faintly resembles an anti-user conspiracy, nonetheless at the end of the day Mozilla Corp. won't ship software whose _default configuration_ runs contrary to the perceived interests of their major funders. My follow-on observation is that this is one reason the browser _defaults_ protect user security poorly compared to what an aggressive reconfiguration + added extensions can accomplish, and that we should be grateful for Firefox, etc. being tweakable in that manner. The company's disruptive switchover from XUL/XPCOM to WebExtensions is impairing that, of course (for now). Time will tell, about that transition. Anyway, it's always worth pondering 'How is this firm making money? Who are its customers? Who are its funders?' _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng