Gary Vee is a notorious grifter NFT salesman with a checkered past.
Webacy is a cryptocurrency wallet “technology layer” that “provides security features” like password backup, “digital wills”, etc.
for fuck’s sake mozilla
So we are doing AI and Crypto, but shutting down Mozilla.social?
Cool. Cool, cool, cool, cool.
This article was released in febuary 2023
Mozilla genuinely believes that this company follows the principles of the Mozilla Manifesto. At least, according to what Mozilla.vc says on its homepage.
(See more of the $35 million of its investments there.)
Other investments include:
- Rodeo, an app that acknowledges the Gig Economy is harmful to Uber and Lyft drivers, but fundamentally doesn’t want to change those harms.
- HuggingFace, a company valued at $4.5 billion already.
- lockrMail, an “inbox protecting” tool with a Chrome extension but no Firefox equivalent, and a direct competitor to Firefox Relay.
Jesus fucking Christ Mozilla… You have one job… Make a browser. Why the duck are you with Gary V, international man of stupidity.
Why would firefox deal with a known scammer?
I guess at the end of the day all of these entrepreneur are scammers.
Mozilla, as always, late to the party.
Crypto and NFT scam were a thing long ago.
I’m trying to keep my faith in Mozilla, but fucking Gary Vee???
I was about to say, can we do some crypto bullshit instead of improving the browser? Love this move for mozilla
My guess is the Google deal is running out soon, and they’re desperately throwing shit against the wall, hoping something will stick.
I still think you should be able to make a decently working browser with the money Mozilla’s CEO earns alone.EASILY!
You all not only don’t read the article, the date published is right there in the URL
There’s already a thread regarding this article’s age in this post
None of that addresses or explains why you posted an older article without noting the age of it.
And you do know how Mozilla Ventures is different from other parts of Mozilla, right?
Title changed. Can you explain your offense at not having [2023] in the title? Other people actually had a reason to complain, but you did not.
Because when sharing anything, it’s important to provide the context of when it was published if it’s older? Especially when there are active and current discussions about a topic (ie governance of Mozilla) and someone could easily be confused about how recent an article is? Otherwise it could appear to be intentionally misleading, which I’m sure was not your intent.
Touche.
