41–50 of 304 posts
How does this compare to something like Privacy Badger[1]? I haven't done any benchmarking, but if it causes similar slowdowns, it isn't bothersome and the benefits are definitely worth it. [1] https://www.eff.org/privacybadger
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This again..
It's a valid objection. GA at this point is on most websites you visit. The data is forwarded to Google where it's processed and stored forever. GA is one of the biggest threats to privacy on the web, and any company claiming to care about your privacy should not be using it.
What is your suggestion, that they should abandon all analytics, or that they should build their own, or do you not have one? Are you willing to acknowledge that GA solves a real problem and provides valuable information?
In my judgement, it makes a lot of sense that Mozilla would use GA. I want them to use it because I believe in their mission, and I'm sure in the balance of things, it helps them maintain a stronger position as an organization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that was more or less the point of the GP minus the condescension bit. Making unqualified statements about what you believe about a large corporation is roughly on par with contesting that particular belief.
Then again Apple has a track record and APIs to put forward. Just about every API in iOS puts privacy first. If you want e.g. location data, the API asks the user's permission -- including with Apple's own apps.
The OsX machine at my office is mystifying, am I supposed to provide my personal credit card to apple to get security updates? That is more secure and insures more of my privacy than not entering my credit card into a system I don't trust?
I view Apple as insulting my intelligence with promises of "convenience" that amount to being able to give them money on impulse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they actually get most of their revenue from the App store and iTunes--and in neither of those cases is privacy good for business.
> Huberty said that Apple's online services are underappreciated by investors because they accounted for less than 6 percent of the company's revenue over the last 12 months. http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/28/apples-app-store-r...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple believes in user privacy. Your naïveté is touching.
Well, Apple makes most money with hardware. Unlike Google who makes most money with ads. So at least in theory Apple can more easily invest in privacy. EDIT: Check their last quarter's results, Apple makes only 6% of their revenue with online services: https://www.apple.com/pr/pdf/q1fy15datasum.pdf
I would love for Mozilla to find other means of funding online content besides advertising. In either case I'd love to see them take a hard stance on privacy and against tracking. They should block trackers that have no effect on website features and restrict and monitor the ones that do effect features. ...and this is another reason Mozilla needs to have their own search engine. They could have much greater influenc…
Edit: ok, revenue is from Yahoo now. That doesn't make me any less confused as to what parent reply meant though.
For those wondering what Firefox tracking protection is - https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/tracking-protection-fir... From my, very quick, tests it appears to work quite well as a poor man's adblocker as well. Nice!
It seems that their protection is based on Disconnect. Does that mean I can get the same level of protection with this feature instead of using Disconnect?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is supposedly getting into the search engine business. It'd be great if they and Mozilla got together, both companies believe in user privacy and could complement each other in getting things down
IMO DuckDuckGo is the obvious choice of who to partner with. DDG already focuses on privacy as a defining feature, its why I use then as my primary search engine. Seems like a win win for both Mozilla and DDG.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd also like a comparison with ublock and/or ghostery. It appears that this becomes enabled after the blocking plugins.
ublock is more about ads, and this is tracking. While they usually come hand in hand, Facebook ads (eg: while on facebook) don't add additional tracking.
I would argue that with Dynamic filtering (enabled for advanced users) the goal of uBlock is not limited to ads, but to any undesired content on the internet. I guess you could say the same about Adblock, though, so I guess YMMV.
[0] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering:-qu...