Ask HN: Why can't I pay for Firefox?

Google's "jump the shark" post yesterday [0] puts into sharp relief the perilous state of the net and privacy generally. If nothing else, it reaffirmed my decision to delete Chrome and fully embrace Firefox - not just as a browser, but the only browser I use across desktop, laptop and phone.

Apple's pro-privacy stance is laudable, but questionable in its permanence - it's more strategy credit [1] than structurally embedded principle.

Mozilla might not be perfect but they're the closest to a organisation where privacy stands a chance of being a meaningful commitment rather than disingenuous propaganda or convenient byproduct of monetisation strategy.

And yet: Firefox is free, and Google remains a major funding source.

Whilst I can donate to the Mozilla foundation [2] (and have) I can't imagine it's a path many will easily find.

Which makes me wonder: why doesn't Mozilla offered a paid Firefox subscription option? Not suggesting it's mandatory, or that it has to offer premium features. Equally realistic about the percentage of users who would actually pay.

Google's funding is around $300M pa [3]. That's 10M users paying $30pa. That's a lot of people, but the internet's a big place. The wikimedia foundation has so far managed to function on donations.

So: why wouldn't Mozilla offer the option? Would you pay?

[0] https://www.blog.google/products/chrome/building-a-more-private-web/

[1] https://stratechery.com/2013/strategy-credit/

[2] https://donate.mozilla.org/

[3] https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/14/mozilla-terminates-its-deal-with-yahoo-and-makes-google-the-default-in-firefox-again/