This is panic over nothing. There is no personally identifiable information being sent with your location, and the location is made to be imprecise.
How does that make this ok?
Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
41–50 of 107 posts
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact you state blink is a standard is everything that is wrong with browser monoculture. It's like we didn't learn anything from IE6. Also blink is just a fork of webkit.
>everything that is wrong with browser monoculture What exactly is wrong with open standards? Would you say linux creates a hosting monoculture? That's just ridiculous. Blink has been contributed to by just about every major tech company, that isn't a monoculture thats how open standards work.
Blink isn't a standard, it's an implementation of multiple standards.
An implementation cannot be a standard since a standard describes what a implementation needs to do while a implementation will need to both decide what parts of standards to implement and how to implement them and will do many things that are not described in standards. There are many behaviors, bugs and implementation details of Blink that should not and cannot be part of a standard.
As soon as a implementation becomes a standard we get ossification and implementation bugs in the standard as the only way to conform to the standard is the exact original implementation.
Besides all that while Blink has contributors from many individuals and companies it is clear that google steers the ship.
The web standards were built on the idea that multiple independent implementations were crucial, and it is a required step for a proposal to become a standard.
Linux isn't a standard either, the standard in that case would be POSIX and linux is "Mostly POSIX-compliant".
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#43> Unfortunately, all major browsers now use a combined address and search bar. So, if you’re typing in the address of a sensitive website to go directly there, your keystrokes as you type will be sent to your default search engine and your search engine may be able to determine the website address you’re typing in manually. That's why it's a good idea to split the search box in the Firefox settings. Ctrl-l takes you…
Most if not all of the bundled search engines send the data over HTTPS and do not save what you type or assign it to your account. There is nothing to worry about.
> and do not save what you type
I think you are dreaming if you believe that.
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most if not all of the bundled search engines send the data over HTTPS and do not save what you type or assign it to your account. There is nothing to worry about.
> and do not save what you type I think you are dreaming if you believe that.
Send a request to Google for all of your data. It won't be in there.
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#45> Unfortunately, all major browsers now use a combined address and search bar. So, if you’re typing in the address of a sensitive website to go directly there, your keystrokes as you type will be sent to your default search engine and your search engine may be able to determine the website address you’re typing in manually. That's why it's a good idea to split the search box in the Firefox settings. Ctrl-l takes you…
I use waterfox because I already hat enough of the firefox bullshit. But even there you now have to enable the search bar. And pressing tabulator when inside the address bar does no longer jump to the search bar but directly into the browser windows.
Dark patterns shit all over this. "Oh sure you can reenable the search bar, but go suck a dick if you used tabulator for switching to it"
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#46This is panic over nothing. There is no personally identifiable information being sent with your location, and the location is made to be imprecise.
How does that make this ok?
Because it's normal in marketing. Most web servers log your whole IP yet people don't freak out about that.
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does that make this ok?
Because it's normal in marketing. Most web servers log your whole IP yet people don't freak out about that.
Today you've told us to use chrome, trust google, and that spyware is okay if it's "normal in marketing". Do you work for google, or are you full of shit takes today for another reason? You clearly don't get what made people like Firefox in the first place. You are so out of touch, it's painful.
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#48Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#49The dark pattern in one image: https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/10/07/suggest.jpg I and I think many others chose "Customize in settings" -- but the actual opt-out is that hard-to-see, third button in small print. We didn't "get opted-in automatically" -- it's this dialog we "opted in" with.
Oh my, that is absolutely fiendish. I had to check the image a couple times before I found 'not now' in the corner.
Re: Firefox: Dark pattern consent dialog invites users to share their location
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact you state blink is a standard is everything that is wrong with browser monoculture. It's like we didn't learn anything from IE6. Also blink is just a fork of webkit.
>everything that is wrong with browser monoculture What exactly is wrong with open standards? Would you say linux creates a hosting monoculture? That's just ridiculous. Blink has been contributed to by just about every major tech company, that isn't a monoculture thats how open standards work.
> What exactly is wrong with open standards?
Nothing, but Blink isn't one.
> Would you say linux creates a hosting monoculture?
Yes, obviously. The GNU/Linux hegemony is a pet peeve of mine, especially because it breeds this absurd "well the most common implementation does X, so screw everyone else" mindset that needlessly hinders alternatives.