121–130 of 201 posts
Disclaimer: will be killed in a few months
>Disclaimer: will be killed in a few months You're thinking of Google. This is Mozilla.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> improving Mozilla’s existing products and services >> creating and developing new products I agree that these are concerning. They seem out of place. If you want to start a petition asking Mozilla to clarify and/or remove these clauses, I would sign it.
I almost opened an issue on their GitHub[1] (one of their privacy-related documents invites people to "call them on it" if you have privacy concerns) but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. [1] https://github.com/mozilla-rally
You make it easy for the internet assholes to do this to you. If your HN username is your real name that is a really big problem for your privacy. Your occupation is stated in your profile. Likewise, stating your sex might as well be your privacy's death knell.
Become more anonymous to provide less ammunition to those with nothing more to do than torment others, then continue doing the things you feel are the right things to do without excuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I want to use Dropbox to share my invoice with my client and my client to share the assets from their designer with me. I don't want anybody tracking what websites I visit, articles I read or facebook videos I watch. These are two VERY different definitions of "data", mingling the two is not helpful to discourse.
>I don't want anybody tracking what websites I visit, articles I read or facebook videos I watch. This whole thing is opt-in, is it not? If you don't want to share your information, you simply do not opt-in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I want to use Dropbox to share my invoice with my client and my client to share the assets from their designer with me. I don't want anybody tracking what websites I visit, articles I read or facebook videos I watch. These are two VERY different definitions of "data", mingling the two is not helpful to discourse.
> These are two VERY different definitions of "data", mingling the two is not helpful to discourse. Indeed, data has complex nuances that are sometimes missed. Let’s not mingle data intended for advertisement with data intended for social science research.
Well those are two different USAGES of the same type of data (tracking). That one is good and the other bad is a different discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But given that you’ve identified a visceral opposition to that, you should consider not opting-in to that particular study. The commenter referenced Rally's privacy policy. It is not specific to a particular study.
I’m being charitable and leaving room for the possibility that they provide a tighter set of policies for some studies or revise their general policy to make commercial use be a study-by-study determination. Or, just don’t opt-in to any of the Rally studies. Your call, it’s your data.
I just reviewed these pages:
[1]: Mozilla Rally Privacy Policy https://rally.mozilla.org/privacy-policy/index.html
[2]: Political and COVID-19 News https://rally.mozilla.org/current-studies/political-and-covi...
Read together, the problematic parts of the general privacy policy are not addressed nor remedied by the specific study's details, because a specific study addresses how that study uses the data.
Perhaps a future study would be different? I doubt it. My take is that the concerning parts of general privacy policy's language will stand (quoted a few messages above). Here's why I say this... Based on my experience with organizations and lawyers, Mozilla is unlikely to want to modify its general privacy policy based on particular discussions with each organization involved in a study; it would be too time-consuming and expensive, and it would create a path-dependence such that every previous study details would need to be reevaluated in the light of a modification to the general policy. Instead, Mozilla probably crafted their privacy policy in a general way, hoping that it will be acceptable to participants and partners. I expect they will modify it as little as possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> I haven't read beyond the linked page > Then you haven’t yet properly informed yourself. Then why have the linked page. If it's literally not informative enough than it's just a poorly written press release.
>Then why have the linked page. If it's literally not informative enough than it's just a poorly written press release. Usually marketing pages will include just enough information and imagery to grab your attention. There will be some links embedded which ultimately lead to more and more information. Basically, if you're interested in learning more, you'll be motivated to read/click further. If it doesn't interest y…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> In that sense any opt-in choice given to another is yet another privacy breach on their 'contacts' for example. That is a non-sequitor, when we are discussing opting-in to social science research. > That is a non-sequitor, when we are discussing opting-in to social science research. As I understand it, the commenter's point does not rest on 'contact' linking being present. Their point is that any kind of data link…
Thank you for your PS feedback, it is appreciated and will be incorporated. My overall point is that if you don’t want data being captured that may provide data about your contacts, then dont opt-in to providing it. Informed consent is the bedrock upon which social science ethics rests.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I almost opened an issue on their GitHub[1] (one of their privacy-related documents invites people to "call them on it" if you have privacy concerns) but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. [1] https://github.com/mozilla-rally
>but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. You make it easy for the internet assholes to do this to you. If your HN username is your real name that is a really big problem for your privacy. Your occupation is stated in your profile. Likewise, stating your sex might as well…
Whenever someone says they want to study anything relating to "misinformation", it's almost a guarantee they're looking to solve human problems with technical solutions. Oh look: "Rally has the potential to help address societal problems we could not solve before." No, I don't think it does. Especially when the first thing you tout is a study on "misinformation about COVID". The fact that American's are locked in a b…
> Whenever someone says they want to study anything relating to "misinformation", it's almost a guarantee they're looking to solve human problems with technical solutions. What in your experience motivates you to say this?
As an educated person interested in facts and science, there is a surprising lack of due diligence in the media around a lot of the current hot topic issues (not going to name them). Every time I do my own research on one of these issues, it is obvious the media and our institutions are more interested in supporting an official narrative than diving deep into the facts. Opposing opinions are just not 'allowed' anymore in some areas. I personally don't even trust people using the word 'misinformation' anymore, as it has been so abused
I am failing to see the motivation for anyone to use this. If you cared about privacy, you wouldn't share your data in the first place. If you didn't care about privacy, there is still no reason to opt in.
You aren't getting my data, stop trying. That may seem harsh, but that is where I'm at. I'm really put off by the idea of sharing my data these days. I don't trust Mozilla's internal audit process to keep it safe, but it isn't specific to them. Outside of maybe a two companies who are 'encryption-first', I don't trust any of them