cloud reps get commission for services sold via their marketplace. Often they even have a bigger financial incentive to sell third party products over native GCP/Azure stuff.
Yeah, but a few years down the road, I learnt that the incentives are often misaligned. For example, the Account Manager wants all their client's consumption in their client's account, so they push the client for a dedicated Cloud deployment, while the other sales rep wants it on the other reseller account, etc.
It also sometimes conflicts with the incentives of us.
To an extent, I suppose. There is also something to be said for just wanting to get outside. Summers in the pacific northwest are also a lot of really long days.
Just writing that, though, makes me realize that most of the northern sections of the US are inline with what we call western Europe? Would be neat to see this broken down by latitude as a crude cohort check.
Most of the northern sections of the USA are on the same latitude as Southern Europe, reaching at most into South France. Germany, the UK are further north than the 45th parallel.
A lot of Europe experiences longer days than PNW during spring to summer.
I've been optimistic on ladybird after watching the speed of progress with tests in their monthly youtube updates, they are quite well presented.
Ladybird is also not ideologically captured by anti freedom extremists with self contradictory beliefs. Mozilla refuses to allow anyone to donate to firefox development because they demand the right to redirect funds you give them towards discriminating against people they don't like.
> Ladybird is also not ideologically captured by anti freedom extremists with self contradictory beliefs. Mozilla refuses to allow anyone to donate to firefox development because they demand the right to redirect funds you give them towards discriminating against people they don't like.
Can you expand on this? This feels wildly editorialized.
So there are 2 Mozillas: There's the Mozilla Foundation, and the Mozilla Corporation. The corporation develops Firefox. The foundation takes donations. For reasons I don't claim to understand (IANAL, and I gather there's tax law stuff involved), the foundation apparently can't give the corporation money to work on the browser. This leads to a regular point of confusion and a complaint because people would very much like to financially support the browser, but there is literally no way to donate to it. Now I believe (again, IANAL) that there are ways they could arrange things so that people could give money to the corporation for the browser, but they have not done those things. A person could plausibly argue that that's because Mozilla Foundation wants people to donate to the foundation and not the browser, though I'm not sure if they've ever publicly said anything explicitly. (If they have, I would very much appreciate links.)
Mozilla's self stated mission as a self proclaimed "global crew of activists" [1] is to "more than deplatform" [2] people they disagree with. Deplatforming just means censorship in this context and they want people they don't like more than censored, they want them off the internet completely. Pretty dangerous for a company making a browser to list infringing on people's human rights as a goal, but they've convinced themselves they're the good guys.
The makers of other browser had either worse incentives, or were bad at getting attention, or couldn't execute, or offered just a reskinned Chrome/Firefox, or included too many avant-garde features that nobody asked for, or existed back when Firefox was liked enough to make them irrelevant.
