For what it's worth, there already have been bugs filed and quickly closed in the Mozilla bug tracker on this. I just created a new bug to make my stance on this behavior clear.
"Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
161–170 of 178 posts
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't reasonably claim "they would not pay for the browser, or pay a subscription [fee]" when it is not even possible for a user to donate to the Firefox project specifically.
You can. There are a lot of open source projects that solicit donations, and if you talk to the developers you will find out that practically none of them get donations that would support even a single developer. The only thing that seems to somewhat work is Patreon, which seems to work fine for some developers that are good marketers, but even there the number of creators that can support themselves is very small, a…
> You can.
No, AFAIK you cannot.
The inability to donate to Firefox is a valid and longstanding criticism of the Mozilla corporate/foundation setup.
Mentioning this deficit in a comment chain about the projects financial sustainability is relevant and appropriate.
It is also true that many projects have funding problems, but that does not negate the parents point.
Mozilla is not a particularly good steward of Firefox and there should be a way to donate specifically to Firefox development, if just for Mozilla as an indicator on what should be their priorities.
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mozilla is like Wikipedia, where the vast majority of the funds they receive go to causes unrelated to development or maintenance of their core product (web browser or encyclopedia).
[flagged]
> theoretically so heavy on entrepreneurs.
I never thought if it like that, and I wouldn't agree at all tbh. But also, as said, never thought about it. What makes you think it is heavy on entrepreneurs?
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#164Seems like it's way too early to be testing this thing, especially when some features important the privacy, like not sharing data across container tabs (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901103) and clearing data when cookies are reset (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901106) haven't even been done yet!
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#165Q: How many people are using a web browser on a daily basis worldwide as their main window to the collective infosphere? A: Billions. Q: What fraction of the corresponding GDP would it take to fund a serious browser-as-public-good initiative that would develop this technology to its full potential without the perverse constraints of adtech business models? A: 0.0001%? Too small to compute? The idea that critical comm…
> The idea that critical communication infrastructure must be (directly or indirectly) supported by advertising interests is certainly not obvious I think the problem is more that the trend over the last 5-7 decades has been to privatise things. The EU (for instance) has rules forcing (e.g.,) privatisation of train companies and postal services. This has caused previously government-owned services to be privatised. I…
> I'd be surprised to hear of any successful case where a non-public good was made public in a Western country.
The UK is renationalising railways now.
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#166No one seem to have outlined this point of view, so here it is:
This feature is supposed to replaced the current tracking methods for advertising purposes – and is better (or less worse) from a privacy point of view. It is currently on by default to ensure there is enough testers. If the test is not successful, the plan is to remove this feature again.
There is a long term benefit for everyone if this is adopted.
Let’s not forget how Google is clawing onto third party cookies, etc., and put Firefox’s position in relation to this.
It does leave a lot of critic points open though: * enabling it by default is really putting a negative light on it. I understand that if it’s disabled by default, no one will allow it and the test will fail due to lack of data points, there is simply no good solution here I can think of. * will advertising companies really renounce the other tracking methods if this method proves useful for them or will it become just one more tool on their belt?
As usual, the worse part if all of this really is Mozilla’s communication, they could have done much better. How could they imagine for a second it wouldn’t become a shitstorm, I wonder…
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Coupons worked, but they can't really work now in the way they used to. People exchange codes in other information channels. Especially in the current, always-connected, high speed internet era.
Doesn't that simply turn the "other information channels" into another advertising channel? If you are putting out codes to bring in customers, and customers arrive with the code, um, mission accomplished?
Maybe, but not necessarily. These channels, like the Honey browser extension, alert users who are likely going to pay anyways, that they can use a coupon to pay less. This I think is a loss for the company, and a misrepresentation of the campaign statistics, if looking at the effectiveness of the coupon code.
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can. There are a lot of open source projects that solicit donations, and if you talk to the developers you will find out that practically none of them get donations that would support even a single developer. The only thing that seems to somewhat work is Patreon, which seems to work fine for some developers that are good marketers, but even there the number of creators that can support themselves is very small, a…
> You can. No, AFAIK you cannot. The inability to donate to Firefox is a valid and longstanding criticism of the Mozilla corporate/foundation setup. Mentioning this deficit in a comment chain about the projects financial sustainability is relevant and appropriate. It is also true that many projects have funding problems, but that does not negate the parents point. Mozilla is not a particularly good steward of Firefox…
Sorry, I think I wasn't clear. I meant to contradict the statement "You can't reasonably claim ..." with "You can [reasonably claim]".
What I am saying is that it is extremely unlikely that people would donate to Firefox, even if was possible to do so. At least not enough to actually pay for more than a few developers. (And you need more than a few developers for a browser, even if you cut useless features nobody asked for like Pocket integration.)
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#169Q: How many people are using a web browser on a daily basis worldwide as their main window to the collective infosphere? A: Billions. Q: What fraction of the corresponding GDP would it take to fund a serious browser-as-public-good initiative that would develop this technology to its full potential without the perverse constraints of adtech business models? A: 0.0001%? Too small to compute? The idea that critical comm…
The problem isn't building a publicly-funded browser, it's building a publicly-funded browser that's good and that can keep up with the demands of the platform - which means taking risks, also when it comes to security and privacy. A publicly-funded equivalent of MSIE 6, heroically made 100% secure and private, would be a disaster for the web. And that's a pretty likely outcome if it's designed by a government commit…
> A publicly-funded equivalent of MSIE 6, heroically made 100% secure and private, would be a disaster for the web
Hard disagree. The web was a much better place when IE6 was still relevant enough to reign in web developers.
Re: "Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
#170Q: How many people are using a web browser on a daily basis worldwide as their main window to the collective infosphere? A: Billions. Q: What fraction of the corresponding GDP would it take to fund a serious browser-as-public-good initiative that would develop this technology to its full potential without the perverse constraints of adtech business models? A: 0.0001%? Too small to compute? The idea that critical comm…
There is an "argument" that people online put forward, perhaps to try to preserve the status quo. It goes something like this: Every browser must implement every "web standard".^1 Meanwhile the incumbent browser vendors profiting from online ads are on the committees that decide what will be the standards. Have also seen Mozilla supporters on HN claim Firefox must "compete" with Chrome and that this means matching ne…
> (An HN commenter suggested sending Referer: news.ycombinator.com to www.jwz.org may have adverse consequences hence the use of IA)
May I suggest to said reader that anyone technically inclined who still keeps that misfeature enabled in their browser deserves the targetted response they get.