"It's just business"

-Sociopaths

It's amazing the inhumanity that little thought terminating cliche validates. Basically "Just following orders" for capitalists.

The reality is hurting others for money as the motivation makes hurting others worse not better. I might hurt someone to save my child's life from certain death in some odd hypothetical, or to avenge my child's death in another, but hurting people... for money? That's as monstrous a reason as doing it for fun.

It's like we're taking crazy pills. "Oh, they were cruel and hurt that person? Let's get them! Ohhhh they did it for private profit, well that's ok then nevermind!"

Give anyone an ounce of power and they turn into heartless corrupt garbage cunts... 💔

Sounds like Mozilla is done for (whether or not they win the suit) and it's just a matter of time before Firefox ceases to exist. You can't tell me this level of political corporate bullshit doesn't scream that they're intent on destroying the company as fast as they can.

I'm withholding judgment until we get more details. I remember reading good things about Teixeira from people who worked with him, so putting aside this doozy of a case, hopefully his health and family will be alright.

Nothing of worth to comment on the case, but something in the article caught me off guard:

Firefox, [...] is the company's only profitable product.

Is Pocket seriously not profitable? I keep seeing contradicting claims about it. Thinking I'll need to learn how to read financial reports to get an actual answer.

Edit: the audited financial statements 2020–2023 show continuous growth in subscription and advertising revenue, which is where Pocket is bundled alongside VPN, Monitor, etc.

That doesn't tell me anything about their individual operational expenses and whether any are profitable, though. Understandably, the organization might not have such a clear distinction between their expenses, or even if they do, they might not need to publish that... So how does one know if Pocket (in this instance) is profitable or not?

If anyone out there who has made claims regarding the profitability of products such as Pocket can point me the way to finding this kind of information, I'd be immensely grateful.

Could be one of those C-suite power plays:

Texeira is managing their one profitable product profitably and looks destined to be CEO.

The old CEO Baker suddenly resigns, and appoints Chambers as (permanent) successor CEO.

Chambers and/or Baker is in tight with the head of HR Chehak, and gets her to declare that Texeira is physically unfit for his job as Chief Product Officer or any other job at Mozilla.

Chambers and/or Baker get their wish for Chambers to become CEO;

Demonstrably competent exec Texeira is essentially out of a job;

Great success!

Fuck I'm reevaluating my life choices in terms of browsers. I assumed the situation of firefox is what it is because mozilla is morally superior and doesn't compromise. It now seems like it's not morally superior at all, so the reason for the current situation of firefox must be just sheer incompetence.

Dammit.

Sounds like some MBA bros and broettes infected the company. I'll stick with it now but it's easy as fuck to change browsers these days

Whoa, that is fucked up. They had no empathy for the guy, and the dude was one step away from CEO. Wtf is going on over there? They've been making sketchy decisions lately.

Well that's a fucked up story. Christ.

As always, all it takes is one egotistical jackass (Laura Chambers in this case) to sink a ship.

Why would they do that? Are they looking for someone to say "Oh, no. I can't sir :("?

Bad management.

Ah pulling a Steve jobs I see.