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

An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 381 posts

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#371

Post by account42 »

mmooss wrote: post #181
wtallis wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they've pioneered such technologies, they aren't using them. Their Privacy Notice enumerates many types of data that Mozilla collects and passes along to "partners"/advertisers. For example: > Mozilla collects technical and interaction data, such as the position, size, views and clicks on New Tab content or ads, to understand how people are interacting with our content and to personalize future content, including…

> There's a lot of tracking data It's meaningless data to you: It doesn't say what you click on, just where and how big the ads are, and how many times you click. It doesn't identify you or reveal anything about you, except that you clicked on some unknown ads. > It's also silly to suggest that targeting advertising without tracking users needs to be "pioneered". It's obvious that Mozilla could have the browser downl…

> It's meaningless data to you

I decide whats meaningless to me. Not you. Not mozilla.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#372

Post by account42 »

doright wrote: post #234
move-on-by wrote: post #4

> The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or othe…

Would it have been better if Firefox/Mozilla went under as a result of never compromising on their principles for income 5 years ago, as opposed to continuing to exist in this less than optimal form today? If the business incompetence of where to put all the existing money were resolved. I feel like the people who understand Mozilla's true principles have long since moved on by this point, and the crowd of those unaw…

> Would it have been better if Mozilla went under

Absolutely. That would have allowed Firefox to fall to better stewardship.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#373

Post by account42 »

xnx wrote: post #211
move-on-by wrote: post #4

> The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or othe…

Hasn't Mozilla gotten enough money that if they hadn't wasted it they could've been living solely off interest by now?

Yes but how could their CEO's family have possibly survived then. You don't want them and the other leadership to starve if they can't have their millions per year, do you?

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#374

Post by account42 »

cmcaleer wrote: post #76
ants_everywhere wrote: post #41

It may be relevant that Mozilla recently acquired a Meta-created ad tracking company and is now awash with Meta ad execs. [0] It may also be relevant that Meta is recently upsetting people in Europe for tracking and targeting people in spite of Europe's data protection rules [1]. My guess (and this is just speculation at this point) is that Meta and Mozilla think they're being clever and getting away with some "priva…

Mozilla mentioned their viability in this statement, but one has to wonder how much more viable they’d be had they not wasted tens of millions of dollars on acquisitions such as this, Pocket, and of course their former CEO’s salary. I would happily donate to a company that focussed on just making Firefox and Thunderbird, but the reason why I don’t and probably will not donate to Mozilla ever again is that I have no i…

> their former CEO’s salary

There is no indicuation that their current leadership salaries is saner and the fact that their only visibile response to the cricism has been to no longer publish saralies it should be assume that it isn't.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#375

Post by [deleted] »

zeckalpha wrote: post #363
lolinder wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what? What part of this definition would include selling a default setting? > selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information Mozilla doesn't need my personal information at all to set a default search engine.

It rents making your personal data available. Under a loose interpretation, which is what they expressed concern about.

[deleted]

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#376

Post by ummonk »

mmooss wrote: post #362
ummonk wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Firefox download information about every ad that advertisers have paid for, and then match against local data to decide which ad to serve? If not, when it queries to find out which ads to serve, what data does is sent with that query (or prior to that query)?

Firefox has done a lot of work on these problems. I don't have it in front of me, but they described in detail what they do.

I haven't been able to find any documentation of this, other than "we acquired Anonym, which claims to send the data to trusted execution environments".

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#378

Post by mmooss »

ummonk wrote: post #376
mmooss wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox has done a lot of work on these problems. I don't have it in front of me, but they described in detail what they do.

I haven't been able to find any documentation of this, other than "we acquired Anonym, which claims to send the data to trusted execution environments".

They've been working on it since long before Anonym. First three links from my search:

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2024/a...

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/principles/

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#379

Post by mmooss »

account42 wrote: post #368
mmooss wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox has done a lot of work on these problems. I don't have it in front of me, but they described in detail what they do.

I'm sure the internet police's thorough investigation into themselves has shown they are doing nothing wrong.

I don't know what that's based on or means, but they do have the mission of protecting privacy and this would be a core contribution to that:

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#380

Post by papascrubs »

ukuina wrote: post #364
inetknght wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody will pay for a browser. Speak for yourself. Give me a browser that clearly and unambiguously does not sell my usage of it in any way, and I will give you a monthly subscription.

Horse Browser? https://gethorse.com

Built on top of chrome (electron actually). Same issues as every other chrome form. Also, doesn't support extensions.
Post reply on HN