@javi
goblin.band

I didn't realize the facebook execs Mozilla acqui-hired last year have been promoted! I was assuming they were still just heading the ads division of Mozilla, but oh boy, I fucking wish.

Now the former Senior VP of Marketing of facebook (2008-2022, the finest years of facebook) is the CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER of the entire Mozilla.

And the former VP of Ads in Facebook (2012-2022), is now the Senior VP of Product of Mozilla.

Let me repeat this:

The guy who used to lead the facebook team that was literally "advertising to teenagers based on their emotional state" is now the guy who decides the direction of Firefox as a product. But hey, let's keep giving Mozilla the benefit of the doubt uh? I'm sure these people-who-should-be-on-trial-in-the-hague are going to do great things for the community!

edit: Bradwood has been promoted to Chief Business Officer of the Mozilla Corporation, not Chief Financial Officer, my bad

edit2: as @FormularSumo@social.vivaldi.net pointed out, even if Graham Mudd's title is "SVP of Product", the bio in his page talks about him as the SVP of Product for the Mozilla Ads division specifically. So it may be the case that he hasn't been promoted and he's just on top of the ad division. That being said, Mozilla doesn't have a Chief Product Officer anymore, and that makes Mudd the most senior product person in the entire Mozilla organization, outranking the VP that seems to be org-wide.

Facebook’s Senior VP of Marketing
is now
Mozilla’s Chief Financial Officer

Facebook’s VP of Ads
is now
Mozilla’s Senior VP of Product
(The apparent most senior position)

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      23·
      21 hours ago

      it’s two separate entities, a corporation and a nonprofit.

      i don’t know why it’s like that.

      • iknewitwhenisawit@fedinsfw.appEnglish
        25·
        20 hours ago

        In the USA there are restrictions on what types of activities a not-for-profit company can do. For example, you can’t pay a not-for-profit to do work for you. So a common approach is to make a for-profit company owned by the not-for-profit. It will pay staff and any bills associated with work for hire or from selling stuff, and donate any money left over to the not-for-profit. Since companies are taxed based on profits, and donations are tax deductible, it lets companies get around the restrictions.

        It sounds dodgy as fuck, but I worked for an open source company structured like this and it is apparently common. The COO even had a letter from the state in a file stating that it was okay. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯