Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

bugzilla.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 196 posts

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#161

Post by Spittie »

gcb0 wrote: post #106

why stop there? - telefonica service for voice chat. - google scam site checker, phone-home component for every site you visit - google services (the things responsible for ads no less) just so you can stream videos on android (can't even build firefox without including that SDK) - adobe binary blob for DRM on netflix. (who even uses netflix on the browser?)

>- google scam site checker, phone-home component for every site you visit

I don't really like it either, but that's not how it works. Firefox downloads an updated list of "non-safe" sites from Google every 30 minutes or so, and check sites against the local copy. A site get sent to Google only if there is a match in the local copy, to check that it's still "blacklisted"

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-does-phishing-and-m...

>- google services (the things responsible for ads no less) just so you can stream videos on android (can't even build firefox without including that SDK)

It's for casting videos to a Chromecast, not for streaming videos. It seems to be possible to build Firefox without it, F-Droid does so: https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdfilter=fennec&fdid=...

>- adobe binary blob for DRM on netflix. (who even uses netflix on the browser?)

I don't like it neither, but I think a small blob for DRM is better than a whole closed addon. It's awful that it got pushed to every installation tho, instead of displaying a "download" button on Netflix and similar sites.

As for your question, it seems that tons of people do so.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#162

Post by hobarrera »

dblohm7 wrote: post #96
browser wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my view, they need to reverse course 180 degrees on things like Pocket and Hello, or it will be the beginning of the end for Firefox. Firefox is a niche product that appeals to the privacy-consciuos. Stuff like Pocket and Telefonica/Hello basically eliminates its reason for being. I have Firefox as my main browser now, but I won't keep it around for long if I have to swat down new marketing integrations in every n…

What's your beef with Hello, exactly? The whole point of Hello is to offer an alternative to Skype/FaceTime that uses open Web technologies and does not require you to create accounts or upload contacts. How does that not appeal to the privacy-conscious?

If that's the intention, they failed horribly. Not because the lack of adoption, but because a propietary server is involved. Only the client is open.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#163

Post by baby »

chimeracoder wrote: post #27

Since all of the comments on this page so far seem to be opposed to the integration: I love Firefox's "Reader View". It's the only way that some pages are readable on my desktop or mobile device, because so many websites try to hijack scrolling, insert modal overlays and ads, or do all sorts of things that make it unbelievably frustrating to just read static text . On the other hand, Reader View lacks a sync feature.…

I can understand how some users are frustrated by that but here's my point of view:

I found this pocket thing to be pretty amazing and I never understood why browsers never integrated such a thing natively. I tried some other solutions before (I can't remember the names) and it never worked for me. They were either badly made or not well integrated in the browser. But this pocket thing. It's just seamless, I save pages here and I read them later on my phone in the subway. That's all I ever wanted from a browser.

Seriously, firefox+pocket+treestyletab is all I wanted.

Maybe integrate the new microsoft browser features where you can draw on a page to share that and that would be perfect.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#164

Post by userbinator »

dblohm7 wrote: post #94
fredoralive wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla is all about the web, except our governance discussions which use something that isn't the web and hasn't been relevant for about 15 years. The basic problem for me is that Usenet doesn't usually turn up on a vanilla Google search, websites do. If Mozilla really is open it should really use something more appropriate to the 21st century to decide policy and governance.

Mailing lists are essential forums for a huge number of open source projects. We're not the first to use them and we aren't going to be the last. I agree that it's perhaps not "webby" enough but that's what we've been using since the beginning and it's what we're using right now.

How about a plain old online forum? That would certainly be "webby" enough and not require much in the way of extra resources if you're already hosting mailing list archives.

In fact I'd argue that it would probably save bandwidth as then you don't have to mail everyone every time someone posts something which not everyone wants to read.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#165

Post by [deleted] »

MisterWebz wrote: post #5

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

[deleted]

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#166

Post by [deleted] »

browser wrote: post #118
jtgeibel wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not as concerned with the Hello integration. With both features, I'd like to know more on the technical details. For Hello, I think Mozilla (but actually unsure who's servers?) is only involved in initial discovery and, if needed, WebRTC NAT traversal. In terms of code bloat, I think Hello is just a bit of extra javascript on top of functionality already built into the web platform. But I admit I haven't look tha…

Hello uses Telefonica servers. My guess is that Mozilla's partnership with Telefonica is the reason why Hello was added to Firefox.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#167

Post by miscellaneous »

gluxon wrote: post #119
MisterWebz wrote: post #5

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

The "Mozilla Manifesto and Pocket" email thread in the Firefox Dev mailing list gives some insight from the developers. [1] To paraphrase: it seems they wanted a reading list feature but found it pointless to re-implement an existing solution with many desired features. (Work which was started but appears to have been scrapped.) This rationalized piggy-backing on Pocket. It gives Firefox a reading list for its users…

I for one don't use Pocket because they have a very poor privacy policy. For me the integration of a 3rd-part service like Pocket goes against everything Firefox says it stands for: free, open, and private internet.

I was enjoying the Firefox reading-list feature because it allowed me to save webpages and sync across my devices without having to put all that information into a proprietary 3rd party service. I thought the reading-list was one of the best features added to Firefox for years, and now they have scraped it. I really can't understand how Mozzilla executives came to the conclusion that this was a good idea.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#168

Post by Artemis2 »

pdkl95 wrote: post #140
MisterWebz wrote: post #5

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

> Why not make it an official extension? It says a lot about Mozilla when they decide to bundle fad features like these after spending years stripping existing features[1] out of Firefox. During their effort to dumb-down[2] Firefox, it was common to hear that removing those features didn't matter, as they should be provided by extensions instead. Apparently that cheap excuse is ignored when the feature when it is con…

http://xkcd.com/1172/

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#169

Post by CarloSanta4 »

I don't like the latest trends at Mozilla at all. I used to use Firefox for privacy. It was small and fast and stable. I don't want to disable all the bloatware like share, sync, Mozilla account, tab ads, pocket, chats whatever. Mozilla is on a big sellout trip. When Mozilla is not different to Google we can equally use Chrome - it's better anyway.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#170

Post by bbubble »

Animats wrote: post #147
dblohm7 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello snooping on your contact information? Where on earth did you get that idea from?

From the Mozilla web site. It's difficult to find, though. Mozilla has a Firefox Hello Terms of Service: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/legal/terms/firefox-hell... which claims to link to the Firefox Hello privacy terms, but actually links to the main Mozilla privacy page: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/ which, in a sidebar, links to the Firefox Hello privacy policy: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/…

Hello Facebook Dialer is not Firefox Hello, though.
Post reply on HN