2,468 karma · joined April 20, 2021
Note that Mozilla Corporations, Mozilla Ventures, and Mozilla.ai mentioned in the articles are all subsidiaries of Mozilla Foundation. If there are issues with the subsidaries' leadership, they could be easily removed by the foundation. If there are issue with Mozilla foundation's leadership then, according to the bylaws, it's not possible for the foundation's board to be removed unless they self remove.
Section 3.3 Election Of Directors, Term. All directors of the Foundation shall be elected annually by the Board of Directors and shall hold office until their respective successors are elected and have qualified, or until their death, resignation or removal.
Section 3.5 Removal. Any director may be removed from office, with or without cause, by the vote of a majority of the other directors then in office.
https://static.mozilla.com/foundation/documents/mf-bylaws.pd...
Technical is important, but just saying that it is easier for the business side to toot their horn.
Nowasdays, even through I don't worry anymore as Windows 11 is happy as long as you give it a quadcore cpu, ram, and an SSD, sometimes I still wonder why it writes 40GB to the SSD everyday.
However, this also meant that the gameplay wasn't well-suited for deep strategy or multiplayer, which was what RTS ended up being about down the road.
We are definitely coming at this from a different angle.
The logical thing for Qualcomm in their current market share to do is to implement TSO now, then after they get momentum, create a high-end/low-end tier, and disable TSO for the low-end tier to force vendors to target both ARM/x68.
What Qualcomm is doing now makes them look like they just don't care.
What's the lesson for future leaders in tech companies?