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

No Surprises (2009)

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#61

Post by criley2 »

atopal wrote: post #60
criley2 wrote: post #40

Does "No Surprises" mean I won't find unwanted Firefox extensions pre-installed by Mozilla that are impossible to remove and only serve to reduce privacy by opening up new unwanted avenues to access my input and broadcast it over third party non-mozilla private networks? Shouldn't I at least be able to opt-out of a private video service running on a third party server that I have no terms of use or privacy policy cov…

Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, it will do absolutely nothing before you opt-in, by making a call. As a bonus: You can make video calls without ever having to create an account.

>"Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, "

Are you being serious right now?

Ok, how about this, We auto-install the Ask Toolbar on every single Firefox installation, 100%, everyone gets the Toolbar.

But don't worry!

If you don't click on the Toolbar which automatically installs and appears in your browser, you won't use it!

It's "Opt in"!

The funny part is, can you tell me how to uninstall Firefox Hello completely?

Mozilla's NO SURPRISES policy says I should be able to uninstall unwanted extensions with no loss to my browser.

So, can you help me achieve NO SURPRISES by removing the surprising and unwanted third party Hello feature?

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#62

Post by callahad »

jacquesm wrote: post #58
callahad wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair; the intent was to only change the search setting for users who had not changed their default. I don't know the specifics around that decision, but it seems like a reasonable position; I'm not sure anything further would have been viable. Still, I get how that can seem intrusive, and I apologize for it. At the time we landed this change, we also tweaked the search box to increase the visibility of alterna…

> We're in a weird place. We have to make enough money to fund the engineering that keeps Firefox competitive, but we also have to stay true to our non-profit mission and ownership. Balancing those two interests is difficult, and we're not always going to get it right. For when we don't, I'm sorry. That I completely acknowledge and there is absolutely no need for you to apologise, where work is being done mistakes ar…

> Is there an easy way for users like me to simply pay Mozilla for the product? I'd much prefer that than being made the subject of a tug-of-war between internet giants.

You can always donate to the non-profit Mozilla Foundation at https://donate.mozilla.org. They do really important work, and there are legal limits on how much revenue the corporation can send upstream to the foundation.

As far as I know, Firefox only has two points of monetization: the default search engine and sponsored tiles on the new tab page. It takes roughly ~4 clicks to switch to DuckDuckGo and disable the tiles. I don't think just changing those is enough to satisfy folks, but I'm not sure how to draw that line. Basing it strictly on monetization wouldn't exclude things like Pocket, which frustrates a bunch of folks on HN.

Can I ask you to elaborate more (perhaps we should switch to email, or, ironically, Firefox Hello?) on what sorts of decisions bother you, and which are non-issues? It seems like the hot buttons for folks tend to be: Yahoo, Pocket, Hello, Tiles, H.264, and Australis. Am I missing any? What would your paid-for Firefox look like?

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#63

Post by eterm »

jacquesm wrote: post #59
eterm wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your browser updates anyway, the "click to restart to get the new version" just initiates a restart. You'll get the new version next time you close and re-open anyway.

The hell it doesn't. No software on my computers runs unless I want it to.

By default, the installations of Chrome and Firefox do this. You choose to configure it otherwise, but this is their normal behaviour.

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#64

Post by jacquesm »

callahad wrote: post #62
jacquesm wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're in a weird place. We have to make enough money to fund the engineering that keeps Firefox competitive, but we also have to stay true to our non-profit mission and ownership. Balancing those two interests is difficult, and we're not always going to get it right. For when we don't, I'm sorry. That I completely acknowledge and there is absolutely no need for you to apologise, where work is being done mistakes ar…

> Is there an easy way for users like me to simply pay Mozilla for the product? I'd much prefer that than being made the subject of a tug-of-war between internet giants. You can always donate to the non-profit Mozilla Foundation at https://donate.mozilla.org . They do really important work, and there are legal limits on how much revenue the corporation can send upstream to the foundation. As far as I know, Firefox on…

Feel free to mail me any time: jacques@mattheij.com

> What would your paid-for Firefox look like?

As free from corporate silos as possible.

I'd happily pay $50 for a clean-by-default (no 3rd party cookies) version of FF.

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#65

Post by atopal »

criley2 wrote: post #61
atopal wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, it will do absolutely nothing before you opt-in, by making a call. As a bonus: You can make video calls without ever having to create an account.

>"Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, " Are you being serious right now? Ok, how about this, We auto-install the Ask Toolbar on every single Firefox installation, 100%, everyone gets the Toolbar. But don't worry! If you don't click on the Toolbar which automatically installs and appears in your browser, you won't use it! It's "Opt in"! The funny part is, can you tel…

Sorry, but mildly put, your definition of opt-in seems to be an unrealistic one. If you think Mozilla should ask whether people want to have a change or not for every single change, then that's your prerogative, it has nothing to do with practical software development though.

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#66

Post by brerlapn »

criley2 wrote: post #61
atopal wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, it will do absolutely nothing before you opt-in, by making a call. As a bonus: You can make video calls without ever having to create an account.

>"Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, " Are you being serious right now? Ok, how about this, We auto-install the Ask Toolbar on every single Firefox installation, 100%, everyone gets the Toolbar. But don't worry! If you don't click on the Toolbar which automatically installs and appears in your browser, you won't use it! It's "Opt in"! The funny part is, can you tel…

Your reply changes the definition of "opt-is". He's not saying "Hello is opt-in because you can choose not to use an active feature if you don't want to", he's saying it's not enabled unless you actually use it by clicking on it, otherwise it is an inert feature that isn't doing anything. You have to take actions (opt in) in order for it to be active. If Firefox included an extra theme with the download, but I had to specifically go in and choose that theme, it would be analogous. Ask Toolbar is not analogous, because it is operational as soon it is installed.

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#67

Post by vetinari »

vdaniuk wrote: post #54

This derogatory treatment of Mozilla by hivemind consensus emerging from opinions of a vocal minority is a curious phenomena and a indicator of the increasing ideological rift in open source community. It can be roughly summarized as a conflict between deontological and consequentialist ethics. User privacy, "meritocracy", freedom from DRM/EME, etc above all else vs strategical trade-offs that strengthen competitive…

How exactly destroying user's trust wrt privacy and including extensions no one wanted does strategically strengthen against competition? I would say it weakens Mozilla's position.

Re: No Surprises (2009)

#68

Post by criley2 »

atopal wrote: post #65
criley2 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Firefox Hello is opt-in. If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, " Are you being serious right now? Ok, how about this, We auto-install the Ask Toolbar on every single Firefox installation, 100%, everyone gets the Toolbar. But don't worry! If you don't click on the Toolbar which automatically installs and appears in your browser, you won't use it! It's "Opt in"! The funny part is, can you tel…

Sorry, but mildly put, your definition of opt-in seems to be an unrealistic one. If you think Mozilla should ask whether people want to have a change or not for every single change, then that's your prerogative, it has nothing to do with practical software development though.

My definition of opt-in is:

"Click INSTALL to install this third party software"

I did not realize that this community had become so adverse to traditional software that asking a user before installing new software was now considered "revising definitions" and weird.

That's all I want: To be asked before third party software is automatically installed.

We used to call that adware/malware when a company bundled third party software without permission.

Now I guess we call it normal.

Post reply on HN