[narag]

what they could do to derive value we would pay for

For someone that found Linux in the 90's and watched the birth of Mozilla from the ashes of Netscape, that's a very strange thing to read.

This site is not Slashdot, I know. It always had another kind of relation to business and money. But still...

I have no idea why Mozilla should need a business model. Much less I understand why should we think of one and agree on it.

How much money does it take to maintain a web browser? If it's a lot, maybe, just maybe, we should agree on a reduced feature set and refuse to use something more complex. Some people here talk about text mode browsers. I'm not so radical. Just keep it simple enough to be maintanable by a dozen of volunteers.

[bn-usd-mistake]

Why? Should we apply the same logic to Linux? Why should we arbitrarily restrict user value because something costs money?

Isn’t the main problem that users are not willing to pay for the browser they use?

Google Chrome is probably maintained by much more than 12 people, so if we restrict Firefox to that, everyone is just going to move to Chrome anyways.

[strictnein]

> I have no idea why Mozilla should need a business model.

Because developers aren't free and "let's get money from Google searches" is great until Google decides not to fund a competitor any more.