Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Better privacy? Non-profit? More open source? Cheerful community? Pick one or more :)


Privacy is about the same, Mozilla Corporation (who distribute the browser) aren't non-profit, both are open source. Correct on community maybe.


The privacy situation is absolutely different; Mozilla has no profit motive to monitor and monetize your activity on the Web. For example, Firefox Sync is specifically designed so that we have no knowledge of your browsing data.

In contrast, when you sign into Chrome, "Your experience in other Google products is personalized by including your Chrome history with your Web & App Activity."(https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/185277)


> Mozilla has no profit motive to monitor and monetize your activity on the Web.

But if a substantial portion of Mozilla's funding comes from an organisation that does have a profit motive to monitor and monetise my activity on the web, then surely that's almost as bad (for me as the end user)?


There's a world of difference. For Mozilla to sell out on user's privacy it would mean game over. They simply can't afford to do so, even if they wanted to (which I believe they don't). Google on the other hand? That's their main business, they are an advertising agency. Sure they make nice products too but make no mistake where their profit is coming from.


I donate to Mozilla because they claim to support privacy, and I want them to be less dependent on large donations.


> Mozilla Corporation (who distribute the browser) aren't non-profit

Mozilla Corporation is wholly owned by the non-profit.

> both are open source

Not to the same degree, as Chrome != Chromium


> Privacy is about the same, Mozilla Corporation (who distribute the browser) aren't non-profit, both are open source.

Chrome is not open-source. Chromium is, but Chrome is not.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: