BrendanEich

I knew Christie and David and worked with both while at Mozilla.

If not for JS, VBScript: VBSConf.us, vQuery.vbs, React.vbs if conceivable.

Don't trust Wikipedia.

I've used the "glue language" phrase myself, but when I did Mocha in May 1995 for Netscape 2, it was to make an HTML-embedded scripting language that could be useful by itself. LiveConnect, by which JS could call Java and vice versa, came in 1996 for Netscape 3.

The "Java" hype dictated the marketing-sought JavaScript name, but JS was useful by itself with the DOM level 0, which I hacked in extreme conditions in the summer of 1995, well before any "merely acting as glue" role for Java applets or components. That "just glue" option came late, and ultimately failed. JS survived and in the end took over from Java and other plugins.

Were you? I have no idea who you are, but the only "other C-level position" was an unspecified throwaway line from Reid Hoffman, who didn't have authority to create any such "Chief of Special Projects" position anyway. The CEO makes the C-level org chart; the new CEO after me was waiting in the wings but in no position to make promises.

You seem awfully eager to assert something false, possibly out of bad conscience. No one involved in my departure had a good solution for my staying at Mozilla, including me.

That was when I thought the attribute was added only when the user searched, but it was added even to a FQDN which should not have been done.

We didn't make anything from this bug, fixed it quickly, it's a black mark on our shield still but it wasn't some mustache-twirling grand plan, believe me. It was a blunder.

Who "he"? I :set et (expand tabs) in vim :-P.

A mundane reason for why donations to the 501c3 parent Mozilla Foundation can't go to Firefox or Gecko engineers is U.S. tax law. We found out the hard way after the IRS San Jose office said we could run only as a foundation and take "sponsorship income" tax-free. They reneged and litigated; this led to the creation of the arms-length Mozilla Corporation that's wholly owned by the Foundation. Per IRS regulations, it cannot be funded by grants from the parent Mozilla Foundation.

The corporation could let users pay for Firefox, and pay tax on that revenue. While I was there, no one thought this would help enough to be worth the effort, compared to just working on other things while taking Google search revshare.

With Brave, I've pushed for user-pays as an option. We let a user buy Premium Search (no ads, but this is possible for free) to support us. It's a small but non-negligible amount of revenue per year, and growing slowly, but we did it on principle. Same will go for buy-once zero-telemetry Brave Origin, stripped down Brave coming in a month or two.

Rewards has always been opt in, so you don't need to get past it to use Brave. We would not be here without it, but use Chrome or Firefox if you prefer. IMHO "really gross" applies to the Google spyware embedded in Chrome, and Firefox has had its share of "gross mistakes" since I left.

For those who don't want to free ride, we will offer Brave Origin soon. One time payment for stripped down Brave, no opt-in UX of any kind.

> ... things like "Come home, white man" and other dog-whistles on image-boards

Wow, that's a new lie.

Do you have any evidence? This isn't something Brave ever did, but it's easy to make unfalsifiable "There's probably archives" b.s. claims on HN.

We never, as in not ever, offered crypto mining in the browser.

The grants came from our token fund, not users' tokens (no way to buy BAT then).

The issue which I found out about late, and fixed right away, was infringing on right to publicity, nothing to do with donations from users' own tokens.