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

Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#341

Post by yupyupyups »

LeChuck wrote: post #330

It's fascinating how any Firefox thread here inevitably devolves into accusations that Mozilla has abandoned users and a push to switch to alternatives, despite Mozilla working in the interest of users to a infinitely greater degree than any other major browser vendor.

Actions speak louder than words. Firefox (including derivatives) is by far the most fingerprint resistant and adblock friendly webbrowser there is.

In terms of features, it's very rich and always improving.

Mozilla also maintains arguably the best web development resource there is, which is MDN.

Mozilla's internal problems aside, some people really don't appreciate how successful Firefox, Thunderbird and MDN have been and still are.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#342

Post by MrDresden »

erikbye wrote: post #223

Switched to Vivaldi long time ago. For reasons like this, ToS, Mozilla changing their mission, etc. Vivaldi respects your privacy, supports Chrome extensions, and all the customizations you'd ever need.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it still an issue that due to Chromium not supporting the V2 manifest, adblockers like Ublock Origin won't function in Vivaldi?

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#343

Post by jmb99 »

gunian wrote: post #201
Spivak wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's gonna be a weird few years that's for sure. I'll leave it to the historians to decide when the actual tipping point was but the shift in the GOP from being run by Republicans with a few bones thrown to Conservatives every now and again when it's time to drum up votes to the show now being run by Conservatives is going to be the point between two political eras. It's by far not the first time this has happened bu…

wait till you unlock 1984 esque reality they are beta testing on us rn when you see slavery is still very alive im sure this will seem like just a playful moment

At least in the US, slavery is alive and well. 13th amendment abolishes slavery except as punishment for a crime, and prisoners all over the country perform forced labour for a small fraction of federal minimum wage.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#344

Post by _Algernon_ »

>UPDATE: We’ve seen a little confusion about the language regarding licenses, so we want to clear that up. We need a license to allow us to make some of the basic functionality of Firefox possible. Without it, we couldn’t use information typed into Firefox, for example. It does NOT give us ownership of your data or a right to use it for anything other than what is described in the Privacy Notice.

From their blog post[1]. Smells like bullshit to me. You haven't had this license for the last 30 years and I've had no trouble browsing. What's changed that you suddenly need it?

[1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-terms-o...

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#345

Post by jmb99 »

jmward01 wrote: post #299

I am, unfortunately, looking at alternative browsers because of this. Firefox was the best fit. Big enough that they could reasonably keep up but not one of the corporate browsers that I have 0 trust in. It wasn't perfect but it was better than chrome for sure. Browsers are like cars now. It is becoming impossible to buy a new(er) car and have your privacy respected, but it is unreasonable to expect any normal life (…

You can always buy old cars. Can’t use old browsers unless you really like getting pwned.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#346

Post by rdtsc »

LeChuck wrote: post #330

It's fascinating how any Firefox thread here inevitably devolves into accusations that Mozilla has abandoned users and a push to switch to alternatives, despite Mozilla working in the interest of users to a infinitely greater degree than any other major browser vendor.

It’s about expectations. In very simple language: people expect Microsoft and Google to track the hell out of them. But Mozilla says they are your friend and respects privacy, but then their actions speak the opposite.

A betrayal from a friend is harder to handle than a blow from an enemy.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#347

Post by mppm »

chmod775 wrote: post #170

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…

I think you are bending the meaning of the word license to the breaking point here. What your analysis implies, is that Mozilla needs permission to store and process your data in order to carry out the services implied by your use of Firefox. Obtaining a "nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license" is definitely an excessive move in that context.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#348

Post by _Algernon_ »

LeChuck wrote: post #330

It's fascinating how any Firefox thread here inevitably devolves into accusations that Mozilla has abandoned users and a push to switch to alternatives, despite Mozilla working in the interest of users to a infinitely greater degree than any other major browser vendor.

[flagged]

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#349

Post by perihelions »

kevingadd wrote: post #140
kazinator wrote: post #134

> Mozilla can suspend or end anyone’s access to Firefox at any time for any reason, including if Mozilla decides not to offer Firefox anymore. On what planet is that free, open source? Can you imagine: "The Free Software Foundation (FSF) can suspend anyone's access to GNU Emacs at any time for any reason, including if the FSF decides not to offer GNU Emacs any more".

This likely refers to Firefox-the-product, not Firefox-the-open-source-project since there's no functional way to revoke your access to a mercurial checkout on your PC. It's not unprecedented to have an open source license with revocation or termination clauses, either. I recall seeing ones that basically say "If you file a patent suit around this open software, your rights to use it are gone".

- "It's not unprecedented to have an open source license with revocation or termination clauses,"

Yes, but aside from jokes[0] it's unprecedented for an OSS license to attempt to restrain the purposes for which end-users use software. That's incompatible with the definition of free software ("free", as in "freedom").

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSLint#License

- "Before that, the JSLint license[4] was a derivative of the MIT License.[5] The sole modification was the addition of the line "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil."

- "According to the Free Software Foundation, this previous clause made the original license non-free."

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#350

Post by tgv »

msla wrote: post #282
jesterson wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define performance? For my use case I don't see any difference in speed compared to say, Safari.

[flagged]

That's simply not true. I regularly find Firefox to be faster than Chromium. And the opposite is also true, but the difference isn't big. None of the two browsers has a clear advantage, and neither gets in the way of normal usage, nor in the way of heavier usage (I do some light data crunching and 2D convolution in the browser).
Post reply on HN