Slashdot Mirror

There's a big difference between offering no evidence at all, and offering evidence which you deem to be inadequate, for some reason.

As for my theory as to the motivations: Did you read the linked article at all, or view any of the pages on the so-called "internet health report" website? I'll just point you to a single pertinent page on the site, wherein we find Mozilla themselves essentially putting forth the very argument that you just discounted: Google dominates browser market. On that page, the Mozilla writers comment on the potential impact which Chrome's dominance can have on the overall market. In particular:

... A lesser known effect of Google’s dominance is that the company has the power to define and implement features of how the Web works for everyone, no matter which browser they use – for instance, through the Web standards process. This is an unfortunate vector of competition, because Google can push for standards or formats that other browsers can’t or don’t want to deliver on. ...

If you know enough about the history of the internet, you might recognize that this statement very closely parallels the state of affairs, from back when Netscape was the dominant browser. For a decent period of time, all other browsers were desperately trying to play catch-up, while Netscape developers introduced new "standard features" one right after another. In some small ways, the impact of Netscape's former dominance (and by extension, those catch-up efforts) can still be felt even today; just take a quick look at the user agent for your browser.

So frankly, if you genuinely believe that the current regime over at the Mozilla Foundation has absolutely no memory at all of those "glory days," than I'd suggest that maybe you're discounting human nature a bit too much. We are all prone to reflect upon our past successes, now and than; that's just a given. It seems to me that one of the "measures of a man" could be found in how you deal with the passing of those successes: do you gripe about someone else who has managed to pick up the torch that you've now lost? Or do you celebrate their victory with them, and congratulate them for carrying the torch forward to the next landmark?

Clearly, in at least this instance, the folks at Mozilla are not doing the latter.

(Also, no... I have no desire to copulate with you. Have a nice day!)

Mozilla's actual inclusion report is confusing. First it says "58% of people in the world can't afford an Internet connection." Then it contrasts the same number "57.8% of the world’s population cannot afford broadband Internet service" with "39.5% of the world’s population cannot afford Internet on their phone or mobile device". My best guess, based on the wording of the Affordability Report that Mozilla's inclusion report cites, is that "broadband" means "either wired service at home or cellular service", not service in a library, restaurant, or Internet café.