11–20 of 480 posts
I'm waiting for it to get so good that it becomes effective at removing the ads Mozilla added to the new tab page.
I understand: cookies are deleted every 24 hours unless you’ve visited the site before in the last 45 days. Does this mean if I visit a site twice the cookie stays but otherwise it’s gone in 24 hours?
So if you get a 3rd party cookie from www.marketingsite.com, but never visited that site, it will be deleted in 24 hours. But if you get a 3rd party cookie from facebook, and you're a semi-active facebook user, the cookie will be kept.
I'm waiting for it to get so good that it becomes effective at removing the ads Mozilla added to the new tab page.
I like that Firefox Home is the default option because you as the user are offered something. If you don't like it, you say no, go to the settings page, and are never offered it again. If you do like it or don't mind it, you keep it. Win-win.
If Firefox Home wasn't on by default, those that might have preferred it wouldn't know what they're missing. It seems difficult to think someone would actually prefer ads but if there's some engagement, then that speaks for itself.
Not to mention Firefox is usually brought to its knees when trying to delete large segments of History/Cookies at once.
I never understood this feature. Why not use an addon instead? Ublock origin for example is much better compared to the firefox tracking protection.
Because the default should be to block tracking. We just shouldn't allow it. Imagine someone telling you a popup blocker (something even IE8 had standard) should be acquire separately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the default should be to block tracking. We just shouldn't allow it. Imagine someone telling you a popup blocker (something even IE8 had standard) should be acquire separately.
I agree with parent though, Firefox should just ship with uBlock Origin installed. I think putting privacy features in the hands of a third-party prevents some poor choices being made due to several conflicts of interest browser vendors have.
I absolutely agree that browser vendors have huge conflicts of interest, and we need to address those by forcibly separating browsers from companies inherently in conflict with privacy.
This is fantastic. I never liked the cookies sticking around forever, and managing them manually was a massive pain if you wanted to keep some of them. Not to mention Firefox is usually brought to its knees when trying to delete large segments of History/Cookies at once.
Is that still the case? I remember that one of the developers was seriously working on improving that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the default should be to block tracking. We just shouldn't allow it. Imagine someone telling you a popup blocker (something even IE8 had standard) should be acquire separately.
I agree with parent though, Firefox should just ship with uBlock Origin installed. I think putting privacy features in the hands of a third-party prevents some poor choices being made due to several conflicts of interest browser vendors have.
But it makes you wonder, if other browser vendors' interests do conflict with ad blocking, why would they ship with uBlock Origin? They would want to control what most people do by controlling the defaults. The vast majority of users never change the default settings.