Why Mozilla Needs To Pick a New Fight

nk497 writes "Mozilla has succeeded in improving the browser world, and its rivals have outstripped it in terms of features. So what's the point of Firefox, then, wonders Stuart Turton. He suggests it could turn its community of developers to better use than battling it out for browser market share. 'I think Mozilla has a lot more to offer as a kind of roaming software troublemaker. The company has already proven itself brilliant at pulling a community together, offering it direction and spurring innovation in a lifeless market. Now that browsers are healthy, wouldn't it be brilliant if Mozilla started a ruck elsewhere?' And where better to start than the stagnant office suite arena: 'Imagine if Mozilla decided tomorrow to build an office suite. Imagine all those ideas. Imagine how brilliant that could be. Just imagine. Now imagine Firefox 4. Honestly, which one of those are you most excited by?'"

Comments

Re:Firefox 4

[commodore64_love]

>>>full polling of how individuals would decide

Democracy leads to suppression of the minority (and the individual). Rule by a Supreme Law that protects minority rights from being trampled by the 51% majority (or overzealous leaders) is a preferable form of organization. Not perfect, but certainly better than a tyranny by the majority. IMHO.

- If you don't believe, consider the fate of Socrates (and others) who lived in the Athenian Democracy. Executed by majority vote, simply because they didn't like his writings.

- Or japanese-Americans during World War 2..... locked up for ~5 years simply because that's what the majority wanted. Too bad President Roosevelt (D) was unwilling to obey the law/constitution, because it was illegal to do that to the Japanese. It could have been prevented.

- That's what your "direct democracy" would create... a society where you could execute someone in your state, or an unliked race, by a simple vote.