Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well if HN users do want to try to lessen that percentage here's the donation page: https://donate.mozilla.org/
It was said earlier today that because of American tax rules donation money cannot go to software development. So donation money goes to outreach and similar. Which is useful but doesn't fund Firefox. Someone please correct me if this is wrong.
Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
211–220 of 411 posts
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you've turned on very strict anti-tracking in a browser if you think that's a weak reason. The setting can really break websites, making them unusable or whole blocks of content don't load. Before this update I used to use Privacy Badger and it also broke websites all the time. I don't believe Safari has anything like what Firefox or Privacy Badger offers built in. So you wouldn't be able to use your de…
Safari has been leading on the privacy front for more than a decade. They were first to block third-party cookies by default (which led to the FTC collecting a scalp from Google when they bypassed it), blocking trackers with ITP by default, and blocking fingerprinting by default [1]. [1] https://www.cnet.com/news/new-safari-privacy-features-on-mac...
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mozilla will gladly protect you from other entities, but they are not user freedom respecting enough to realize that they should also not require you to submit yourself to them. My argument is that allowing users to "opt out" from tracking is insufficient, and I will argue against it whenever possible.. You should be asked and informed before ANY DATA IS SENT to them, not just informed that it is already happening an…
You're right - the user should be asked and informed before any data is sent. But the situation is more complex than that. - For better or worse, most people aren't scared of the Internet, so they don't want a detailed, itemised list of risks and mitigations to allay their fears, they just want to get down to business. How do you ask and inform a user who refuses to answer or read? - People want to use the web-browse…
Firefox has fought this uphill battle before and they didn't need telemetry to do it. When chrome first came out it had improved the UI and it didn't need telemetry to do it.
Since firefox added telemetry their market share has declined and their UI has got worse, the idea that telemetry improves products needs to die.
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This always-negative/outrage attitude just erodes any sort of meaningful discussion. They destroyed some of my bookmarks when they dropped RSS support. That isn't privacy-eroding, it's data destruction, and they didn't even let me opt out. I know they probably had a lot of conversation about it, but when the conversation ends with "And then we destroy the data of random people without letting them say no", you need…
This is what I mean by an attitude that doesn't contribute anything to the discussion at hand. They announced this change in October, and implemented it in December.[1] I don't understand why you were unable to make alternate arrangements in that time. It feels like you're going out of your way to find something to be angry about. In addition: >Firefox will tell you when support for Live Bookmarks has ended and will…
I shouldn't have to make "alternate arrangements" to prevent software from deliberately destroying my data.
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#215> You probably wouldn’t appreciate someone tracking your moves in real life. There’s no reason to accept it online. Great to read something like this on mozilla.org.
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
Getting a targeted advertising that is likely relevant to you is probably one of the few positives of tracking. The issue people have with tracking is not 'what ad am I getting on a given website'. To get a targeted ad they need to maintain a database of privacy infringing information. 3rd parties having this data, and what they might do it with it (or who they might lose the data to) is what many people have an issu…
Serious follow-up: I've always been fairly apathetic towards companies tracking me because I don't see too many plausible situations that would end up truly affecting me negatively. Do you have any examples (preferably that have happened in the past, but hypothetical are okay too) of what can go wrong if the tracking information falls in the wrong hands? Sure, street addresses, SSN's, credit card numbers would be bad…
For the former, I agree it's a little hard to find realistic examples that don't involve having something to hide (but if you do, those are easy: porn history, extramarital affairs, time spent goofing off on various websites, surprise gifts, pregnancy, financial problems, stalkers, ...) Still, do you close the door when you take a shower? Do you sing in public? Do you disclose your salary in casual conversation? Those might seem silly, since the discomfort there mostly hinges on fully public disclosure, but the data are getting shared so widely now that it's getting easier and easier for the data to escape to places where they can be pulled up by someone who is bothered by your NextDoor post.
The other main category is the problems with massive numbers of other people's data being available to these companies. Those are more societal effects, like segmenting the population, radicalizing us, and setting us against each other. Outrage culture. Hyperpartisanship. Phishing. Vulnerability to external trolls/griefers/fake news publishers. Functionality being lost because it's overloaded by targeted spam. Harassment of minority groups (heck, you only need preferred language for some of that, though purchase history would reveal a lot more.)
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
The irony is they tried diversifying their income. But people don't want their browser to ask for donations (that's nagging). They don't want their new tab page pre-populated with websites on a new install (even if their browsing overwrites them). They don't want "fun" additions to advertise TV shows (even if they're opt-in). But they're happy to pay via google's search and tracking. Mozilla doesn't have a lot of opt…
Firefox has ~250M users as of about 9 months ago and $562M revenue for 2017. I'd honestly pay $2 per month (12 times "my share") for a Firefox that completely disavows the ad model and produces a truly user-centric experience sans ads, fingerprinting, etc. However, given that over 95% of their revenue comes from Royalties, I don't see that turning around any time soon.
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#218Google's reCAPTCHA makes it impossible to use large portions of the web once you take reasonable measures to protect your privacy. The challenge will continuously fail, despite you spending time to carefully solve it. This cruel behavior is described in a patent [1] by Kyle Adams of Juniper Networks. [1] https://patents.google.com/patent/US9407661
If everyone would block it the website owners would have no choice other than to move to a different captcha system.
Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#219Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox
#220> You probably wouldn’t appreciate someone tracking your moves in real life. There’s no reason to accept it online. Great to read something like this on mozilla.org.
Ironic, though, given their stance on opt-out-only telemetry.