31–40 of 183 posts
I wrote something similar a while back, and it’s in a similar state of not-updated-ness http://fixfirefox.com
> Your connection is not secure
>
> SEC_ERROR_EXPIRED_CERTIFICATE (expired October 31, 2017)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Brave are just a different kind of evil. They basically want to hijack advertising and tracking so that they get the money rather than google, but it’s the same crap.
Where did you get that idea? His stance on SSM aside, Brendan Eich is not a guy I typically associate with evil. The whole raison d'être of Brave is to restore privacy to consumers of advertisements while being fair to publishers. The codebase is all MPL2 on Github. Nothing stopping you or anyone forking it, yada yada.
"These are used by Mozilla to spy on you, and are as such a significant risk to privacy." Wow that's a big claim. Any proofs that the data collected is not anonymous? It sounds a lot like fear-mongering
Yeah. Companies should be transparent about the data they collect and how they anonymize it – and should be easily disabled if needed if you need serious privacy, as is possible that some resourceful actor could de-anonymize the information somehow. But this kind of data is not necessarily harmful. People disabling telemetry will often be the same ones complaining about "poorly written applications and company X shou…
No.
"These are used by Mozilla to spy on you, and are as such a significant risk to privacy." Wow that's a big claim. Any proofs that the data collected is not anonymous? It sounds a lot like fear-mongering
Yeah. Companies should be transparent about the data they collect and how they anonymize it – and should be easily disabled if needed if you need serious privacy, as is possible that some resourceful actor could de-anonymize the information somehow. But this kind of data is not necessarily harmful. People disabling telemetry will often be the same ones complaining about "poorly written applications and company X shou…
"These are used by Mozilla to spy on you, and are as such a significant risk to privacy." Wow that's a big claim. Any proofs that the data collected is not anonymous? It sounds a lot like fear-mongering
Websockets? Really? Even if they are an ugly hack on top of HTTP, they are too damn useful to be disabled. Let's disable Javascript too while we are at it.
Yes, let's do that.
Websockets? Really? Even if they are an ugly hack on top of HTTP, they are too damn useful to be disabled. Let's disable Javascript too while we are at it.
Anybody knows if it is possible to use Pocket with a custom server? So far I found only the ticket which tracks the open sourcing process of pocket: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1343006 11 month old, not even assigned yet... looks like I should come back 2038.
Fwiw, I wasn't a fan of the original integration of pocket into Firefox, but they are now completely owned by Mozilla: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-po...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. Companies should be transparent about the data they collect and how they anonymize it – and should be easily disabled if needed if you need serious privacy, as is possible that some resourceful actor could de-anonymize the information somehow. But this kind of data is not necessarily harmful. People disabling telemetry will often be the same ones complaining about "poorly written applications and company X shou…
Yet organizations went decades making fantastic and ever-improving software without telemetry. What changed? Why would telemetry suddenly become a basic requirement for improvement?