251–260 of 1001 posts
Since it's mostly just people who care about this privacy who still use Firefox, these changes seem particularly tin eared.
People who care about privacy have already moved on to LibreWolf or some other Firefox alternative.
What choice do we have then?
Is there a “brave” browser that uses Firefox?
I thought Firefox sync and VPN was end to end encrypted. That is a far bigger wtf than dumb unenforceable tos text.
It is unenforceable by YOU, since Mozilla has reserved all rights to all the data you put through your browser. Which is why I'm currently using LibreWolf for the first time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have to grant Word a license to what I type in it. This is a highly unusual clause that other software doesn't have. When software has to "phone home" to deliver the functionality you requested, then two things happen: One, a number of privacy regulations kick in, and they need to get you to agree to send your data to them. Two, they now get to move your data out of your control. I mean, you trust them today,…
> I don't have to grant Word a license to what I type in it. Yes you do. From Microsoft's Services Agreement [1]: > To the extent necessary to provide the Services to you and others, to protect you and the Services, and to improve Microsoft products and services, you grant to Microsoft a worldwide and royalty-free intellectual property license to use Your Content, for example, to make copies of, retain, transmit, ref…
Word versions that predate the share button probably wouldn't need the license grant. But since MS likes to limit the number of different licenses it was probably still in there to cover SharePoint and OneDrive
Title is a complete lie/misleading. They get a license, not ownership. Let's dissect what it actually says, and we do it backwards, because given the discussion around this subject it seems like people space out or have their mind clouded by outrage before they get to the end of the sentence: > help you [do things] as you indicate with your use of Firefox. So this already only covers things that you indicate you want…
This definition of helping me (a user} navigate could be interpreted in many ways, from the obvious all the way through to sending Mozilla my data so they can "improve Firefox" and therefore help me through giving them my information. This signals intent against my interest, regardless of whether that actually is there intent. The 'help' in particular is extremely suspicious and ambiguous
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iceweasel has been around for sometime: https://github.com/adonais https://sourceforge.net/projects/libportable/files/Iceweasel... Forks can be healthy for a number of reasons =3
Oh, I thought IceWeasel had been renamed to IceCat, but the repo you linked to has recent activity and calls it IceWeasel, now I'm a bit confused. Glad to see it's active though.
Compiling Firefox without telemetry is just a flag, as we discovered while doing something over the debugging interface not available in the Windmill Test Framework. Tip: running profiles off a ram drive reaches ludicrous speeds.
Tor Browser also works: https://www.torproject.org/download/languages/
Best of luck =3
https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b... They removed this: { "@type": "Question", "name": "Does Firefox sell your personal data?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That’s a promise. " } },
Title is a complete lie/misleading. They get a license, not ownership. Let's dissect what it actually says, and we do it backwards, because given the discussion around this subject it seems like people space out or have their mind clouded by outrage before they get to the end of the sentence: > help you [do things] as you indicate with your use of Firefox. So this already only covers things that you indicate you want…