41–50 of 270 posts
As a web developer i don't think i have ever supported this feature, but only because i never remembered to. It's a pretty easy feature to add, but unless browsers can force it, you're better off with uBLock.
So rather than eliminate it with another thing that is nothing more than a name changes, it should just become useful
> However, as we approach 2025, with growing concerns about online privacy and data protection, Mozilla believes that DNT is no longer an effective privacy measure. Many websites ignore the DNT signal. Therefore, Mozilla has removed the DNT signal from Firefox version 135. This is spurious reasoning. "Many" is neither a percentage, or a basis for justification. Many people ignore speed limits - so what? >The company…
From a product perspective, this is an additional option in their settings page that is confusing and marginally useless. I work on creating user facing products as my job, and I 100% support this decision.
I'll be honest: nobody is going to stop Firefox because of this, because it does not affect their life in any way or manner.
> However, as we approach 2025, with growing concerns about online privacy and data protection, Mozilla believes that DNT is no longer an effective privacy measure. Many websites ignore the DNT signal. Therefore, Mozilla has removed the DNT signal from Firefox version 135. This is spurious reasoning. "Many" is neither a percentage, or a basis for justification. Many people ignore speed limits - so what? >The company…
Websites don't just "ignore" DNT, they actively use DNT to improve tracking. From a product perspective, this is an additional option in their settings page that is confusing and marginally useless. I work on creating user facing products as my job, and I 100% support this decision. I'll be honest: nobody is going to stop Firefox because of this, because it does not affect their life in any way or manner.
I do agree with your point on people continuing to use Firefox in spite of this. Most people are not invested in the details, or don't care about security/privacy, or can't be bothered to figure out which other browser option is best for their use case.
My annoyance is more so on their behalf - that average people will probably be unaware of what security feature is being taken away from them. Do they care? Probably not. Will it change much for them? No. It irks me, however, that they no longer even have the option.
> However, as we approach 2025, with growing concerns about online privacy and data protection, Mozilla believes that DNT is no longer an effective privacy measure. Many websites ignore the DNT signal. Therefore, Mozilla has removed the DNT signal from Firefox version 135. This is spurious reasoning. "Many" is neither a percentage, or a basis for justification. Many people ignore speed limits - so what? >The company…
I understand that many people here have a bad taste of Mozilla's recent actions in many aspects. But the reality here is that this is at worst removing something that almost nobody respected. It was based on honor system and even in Switzerland they do have random inspections for honor system. Browsers never had any enforcement of this feature. And ironically it was used as additional data point of tracking privacy a…
the conversation / system is rigged. how it should have been done in a fair way: 1. assume the user by default does not want to be tracked and make do-not-track opt-out. 2. have it running for a few years and gradually increase the heat on the discussion that nobody respects it. If it would've been done this way it would've been newsworthy and maybe would've been considered as something to enforce via regulation (at…
So GPC is basically the same as DNT, but according to [1], "GPC improves on DNT in several ways:" - Legal backing: Unlike DNT, GPC is supported by more laws, like the CCPA, which requires businesses to honor these signals. - Targeted approach: While DNT broadly addressed tracking, GPC focuses specifically on stopping data from being sold or shared, making it more relevant to today’s privacy needs. - Better adoption p…
> GPC is supported by more laws, like the CCPA, which requires businesses to honor these signals Because it's off by default? It's the exact same thing, a header with a preset value. > While DNT broadly addressed tracking, GPC focuses specifically on stopping data from being sold or shared, making it more relevant to today’s privacy needs. My needs are not being tracked. The tracking is what comes before the selling.…
It depends. While I agree that GPC is technically just a more complicated form of DNT, the major difference is that DNT is 100% optional for websites to honor, which is why they don't, but GPC becomes mandatory for nations that have reasonable laws around tracking. Companies operating in those nations will honor it because there are legal penalties if they don't.