271–280 of 721 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outsider here: whats wrong with brave? I haven’t touched it but have no reason to distrust it, happy for you to change that for me though
Brave's business model is based on crypto-speculation. Think of the type of business involved with that, and there's your answer.
It could be a freemium model: users paying for premium features (Sync, VPN, ...) support the company, for example.
Bizarre and scummy beyond belief. They claim to be all about privacy to sell their VPN service. And then they also start selling what you type into the address bar to some creepy adtech company, so they can show us ads.
Such shame there’s no one to hold Mozilla management to account for this kind of malfeasance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "When contextual suggestions are enabled, Mozilla receives your search queries. (...)" This, right here. They get those regardless of whether you click on anything. What happens with those queries afterwards? > "No new data is collected, stored, or shared to make these new recommendations." If that's true, it would imply search queries were already being sent to Mozilla. I hope it isn't true. I feel incredibly dumb…
> What happens with those queries afterwards? https://blog.mozilla.org/data/2021/09/15/data-and-firefox-su... > Mozilla approaches handling this data conservatively. We take care to remove data from our systems as soon as it’s no longer needed. When passing data on to our partners, we are careful to only provide the partner with the minimum information required to serve the feature. > A specific example of this princ…
Meh, the feature is easily deactivable, the settings are clear and extensive. As far as ads go, it's one of the best implementations. Firefox still has no alternative in the privacy / user-centric space (don't mention Brave, I'm gonna get mad). Mozilla has done a lot for the web, I can give them some slack for exploring different revenue models. Still, I'm going to keep on eye for this kind of practices in the future…
Thanks a lot for mismanaging your budget like seemingly every other non-profit, Mozilla.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it really sucks. I've been using Firefox for 15 years or so but this shit is just so discouraging. Can't we have one piece of good software that doesn't try to shove "relevant" "suggestions" from "trusted" "partners" down our throats? I just want a browser that isn't controlled by the ad mafia.
A browser is expensive. Currently Firefox is funded (though not controlled) by Google's Ad business. I am all for them reducing their reliance on Google's Ad business. In this sense this is a step _towards_ what you want. I really really dislike them double speaking about this though.
I also don't understand what will stop all five of their remaining users from switching to IceCat, Chromium, or Brave.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You don't see a slightest problem with that, no? If adMarketplace is just receiving from Mozilla a stream of (search text, city, clicked yes/no) then no, I don't see a problem with it. If Mozilla sends a unique user ID as well then I would see a problem with it, but as far as I can tell, they don't.
You are OK that - by default - you type something in the Firefox address bar and some random company you've heard of gets a copy of it? You are A-OK with this? Because this is on by default in FF93, be it a new install or an upgrade. For now limited to the US, but it's safe to assume they are just testing waters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Building a shell around Chromium or Webkit isn't very expensive. Maintaining an independent, high-quality browser engine so that the design and implementation of the Web isn't up to a Google/Apple duopoly is incredibly expensive: https://robert.ocallahan.org/2017/12/maintaining-independent... (4 years old, but the situation I describe hasn't changed, except that Microsoft has switched to Chromium so Mozilla's engine…
"Microsoft has switched to Chromium" Feels like a massive missed opportunity - microsoft is the only big player not funded by ads. Also having their own Engine was cool, i liked it, although it did sometimes have failures. Looks like they got tired if different issues and thew in the towel
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chrome keeps adding more and more features to the web standards to make sure no one else can keep up with the price of implementing them, and Mozilla likes sucking Google's cock until they gag, so they accept and put all of them in Firefox. Not to mention all the absurd overhead you pointed out. All of Mozilla's wounds are self-inflicted.
Mozilla are in a no-win situation: - implement the standards and they get blamed for dancing to Google's tune - don't implement the standards and people quickly drop Firefox because it doesn't support "the modern web" The only way Mozilla can compete is to play along. So it's better they do that and take the criticism than ending up obsolete through stubbornness.
> Firefox has always provided address bar suggestions, such as websites from your browsing history, bookmarks and open tabs (on by default), as well as suggestions from your default search engine. Beginning in Firefox version 92, you will also receive new, relevant suggestions from our trusted partners based on what you’re searching for. No new data is collected, stored, or shared to make these new recommendations.
Given that these recommendation require PII processing (e.g. IP, location) by Mozilla, and "no new data is collected, stored (...)", how does that work? I don't recall ever giving consent to Mozilla to process my data.
(Yes, I'm pissed. They just admitted to going to bed with advertisers, and didn't even bother to give us a honest explanation. You can bet I'm looking if they can be slapped with GDPR.)
EDIT: missed this on first reading. I blame banner blindness.
> Note: Firefox Suggest is currently available for a limited number of users in the U.S. only.
Right. I wonder why?