Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Hardware supplier and content broker (Score 2) 43

I have 4 Roku's scattered around the house. Most were bought on-sale and it's hard to imagine that Roku made any significant profit on the sales. We don't have any use for Roku's programming, getting all of our content from Prime, Youtube TV, Netflix and Hulu. Unless Roku gets a kickback from those services for brokering them, I can't see any profit stream from a customer like us.

Comment Re:Insider here, via a friend (Score 2) 68

Virtually all California CCW permit requests submitted without "special handling" were rejected because the applicant could not demonstrate a need for the the permit. The Supreme Court decision New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen found that need was not sufficient reason to deny a permit request. As a result pretty much all California CCW issuing authorities are granting permits to those that otherwise qualify.

Comment Ironically.... (Score 1) 68

The Supreme Court in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, ruled that concealed carry permit applicants no longer have to show a need in order to qualify for a permit. As a result, thousands of Californians have been approved and issued concealed carry permits.

The bribery ultimately accomplished nothing other than getting someone a felony accusation and Apple bad publicity.

Comment Re:Suddenly I really like Android (Score 1) 218

Having watched my 30-something daughter and her husband convert to iPhones a couple of years ago, I can make these observations:

The promise of something New and Shiny.
The promise of low monthly payments for that Bright and Shiny Thing.
The promise of being able to shoot movies with the Bright and Shiny Thing.
The promise of an integrated audio and video post production with the bytes from the Shiny Thing.

Submission + - Firefox Money: Investigating the bizarre finances of Mozilla (locals.com) 1

quantic_oscillation7 writes: "Payments to nonexistent companies? Funding politics? Reliance on a single customer? And that's just for starters."

"As of 2021, Mozilla (including the Foundation and the wholly owned For-Profit Corporations), had total assets worth over $1.1 Billion USD. That’s Billion. With a B."

"The head of Mozilla earned roughly $5.6 Million during 2021. The rest of the executive team ranged, more or less, from $100k to $300k.

Interesting to note that the Mozilla CEO earned nearly as much ($5.6 M) as Mozilla received in donations ($7 M)."

"Where, exactly, does all that money go?"

"Mckensie Mack is a public speaker who regularly discusses her anger at “White Colonialism” and her dislike of “CIS” men and women. The “Mckensie Mack” company website blog primarily discusses abortion and Trans related issues.

Why would a company that develops a web browser want to pay her close to half a million dollars (in one year)? That remains unclear. It is, however, worth noting that this is a far larger expense than any of the executive team of Mozilla earn in salary (other than the CEO)."

"That founder, Neil Lewis Jr., appears to have focused his career on “vaccine acceptance”, problems with “white” people, and his theory that “white people” can not be victims of discrimination.

What does this “Action Research Collaborative” actually do? Why would Mozilla need their services and be willing to pay $100,000 for it?"

"So many questions
The deeper we dig into Mozilla and their financials, the more questions come up.

Why does Mozilla give so much money to political speakers that have no relationship to their core business?

Why does Mozilla seem unconcerned with alienating a large portion of their user base (which is already shrinking)?

Why do some of the recipients of Mozilla money appear to be nothing more than empty shells of companies — not even having a simple website?

Why does Mozilla continue to take donations if it doesn’t need them?

Where does Mozilla spend those donated dollars? Do they go to the strange discretionary spending or political organizations?

With the 70%+ reliance on Google (a competitor) for revenue, why is Mozilla spending money on projects that have no goal of being profitable (and have no relation to their core business)?

What happens when the Google funding goes away? Mozilla appears certain that it never will (based on their spending). why is that?

Why is Mozilla decreasing software development funding when development of Firefox is the cash cow?"

Submission + - Wikimedia Foundation spends $2 million on countering racial bias

Andreas Kolbe writes: For the past couple of years, the Wikimedia Foundation has used a part of its Wikipedia donations to operate a "Knowledge Equity Fund" designed to counter racial bias and discrimination.

As part of this, it has given away over $2 million to organisations unrelated to Wikipedia, as reported in The Signpost, Wikipedia's community newspaper.

The project has been controversial, as Wikipedia donors are thought to be unaware that part of their donations may be used for purposes other than the direct support of Wikipedia and Wikimedia's own operations. Others argue that supporting the build-up of media and tech infrastructure to increase the visibility of marginalised groups ultimately contributes to better knowledge coverage in Wikipedia.

Organisations included in the latest round of Knowledge Equity Fund grants include –

* Black Cultural Archives ($290,000, UK)

* Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (Alliance of the Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago, $200,000, Indonesian human rights and advocacy organisation)

* Criola ($160,000, Brazil, advocacy for Black women's rights)

* Data for Black Lives ($100,000, US)

* Create Caribbean Research Institute ($75,000, Dominica, digital literacy and coding education for children)

* Filipino American National Historical Society ($70,000, US)

* Project Multatuli ($50,000, Indonesia, non-profit journalism especially on indigenous people)

Further grants from the $4.5 million fund are planned as suitable grantees are identified.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never ask two questions in a business letter. The reply will discuss the one you are least interested, and say nothing about the other.

Working...