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

Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

protocol.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 295 posts

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#71

Post by ailideex »

bilekas wrote: post #12
throwaway8291 wrote: post #3

I'm using Firefox for years, after Chrome started to ask me for a login (at around version 40). Never looked back. One day I woke up to a chart showing browser market share of FF at around 4%, which surprised me - as I thought many people would understand the implications and directions. Maybe I'm too optimistic. Update: Loved chrome, used it for years, I also love most Chrome engineering and all the innovation they…

I'm on my waay BACK to Firefox, there was a strange period when I left, Firefox just seemed really heavy on my machine, and it was super intensive for some dev tools. Now I say the same about chrome and find FF much lighter and efficient. Delighted that FF are taking a bit of a stronger stand here in the privacy dept too .

Using Fedora Linux, last I tried a switch to FF (less than 6 months ago) it was way slower than chrome. I actually like FF functionality more and would prefer to use it but my laptop runs significantly hotter when I run FF on it.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#72

Post by [deleted] »

zzzcpan wrote: post #49
heartbeats wrote: post #36

If they want to do something, there's a simple three-step plan. 1) block all ads, by default 2) do not unblock Google's ads, 3) receive Adblock Plus-style bribes from Yandex or whoever to whitelist them, provided they don't harm privacy This would kill several birds in one stone. First, break Mozilla free of Google funding. Second, hurt Google. Third, increase Firefox' market share. Fourth, help users' privacy. As th…

They could probably exist without Google funding, like just supporting a Chromium fork with fast native adblocking. But obviously not as a thousand people company.

[deleted]

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#73

Post by ksec »

Ygg2 wrote: post #9
throwaway8291 wrote: post #3

I'm using Firefox for years, after Chrome started to ask me for a login (at around version 40). Never looked back. One day I woke up to a chart showing browser market share of FF at around 4%, which surprised me - as I thought many people would understand the implications and directions. Maybe I'm too optimistic. Update: Loved chrome, used it for years, I also love most Chrome engineering and all the innovation they…

> Maybe I'm too optimistic. Don't be optimistic, but don't be pesimistic either. Do what you can - donate time or money, or just recommend everyone to not use the piece of carp that is Chrome. Anything based on Chromium counts as well, their codebase is dictated by Google, one way or the other. My mom had so many issues with ads until I installed Firefox for her, and honestly, the ad blockers make the internet a much…

>Don't be optimistic, but don't be pesimistic either.

The Modern US / Silicon Valley mentality is you have to be optimistic at all cost. Being Realistic is counted as pessimism.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#74

Post by ksangeelee »

ilitirit wrote: post #10

> Mozilla lost the browser wars Honest question... who did they lose to? Google Chrome? For me personally, Firefox has been better than Chrome for several years now. The only reason I still load up Chrome is when I want to stream to my Chromecast.

That line jarred with me too. It might be a metaphor that makes sense where commercial entities are competing for a winner takes all outcome, but it doesn't fit here.

I recall when Mozilla made it a central goal to adhere strictly to web standards, at a time when it was really tedious to get cross-browser compatibility, and other browsers followed them.

To me, that alone is a big win.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#75

Post by Anon1096 »

heartbeats wrote: post #46
groovybits wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a privacy enthusiast, what's wrong with Google's SafeBrowsing service? It provides protection from low-hanging fruit with anonymized data (hashes of URLs).

It's not very anonymized. Google already has a list of URLs, so they can just hash them all and see what matches. And if they have URL 1, 2, and 4, odds are they can interpolate to find out what #3 is.

I don't think you understand what anonymized means. Yes they know that someone went to those URLs... but they can't link it to a person. So it's anonymous.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#76

Post by ocdtrekkie »

MrsPeaches wrote: post #43
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #34

The aforementioned Facebook Container was an excellent step, but if they really were serious about fixing Internet privacy regardless of their financial backers, they'd ship an official Google Container as well. (A third party developer ships one as a fork of Facebook Container, but it'd be far preferable for a Mozilla shipped one.) They capitalized on the Cambridge Analytica scandal with the launch of that extension…

As sister comment points out: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

Facebook Container requires and builds on this extension, you actually can’t replicate the functionality with that addon alone.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#77

Post by ecmascript »

Angostura wrote: post #67
ecmascript wrote: post #62

Mozilla essentially did a "get woke, go broke". They fired Brendan for ridicolous reasons, they focused on products that were useless and were really focused on spreading propaganda for woke causes. I still use Firefox everyday since it's the best browser for linux but I also use Brave. Mozilla as a company in my eyes are a bit lost and they need more focus on their technology. It seems like they have realized this i…

> hey fired Brendan for ridicolous reasons Marriage equality isn't a particularly ridiculous reason.

So because you're a CEO you can't believe whatever you want in your spare time? Or does the same rules apply for everyone that works at Mozilla? If so, how the fuck does anyone know what is a fireable opinion? It's not like he used company resources to promote his beliefs or enforced his beliefs on others. What Mozilla did to Brendan is essentially to enforce thought crime on their own staff. It's kind of hard to take them seriously when they say they value integrity after that.

This idea of an outrage culture is what makes Mozilla go down the shitter. No one cares about that shit except a very small minority in SF.

It's not like Google or most other for-profit company cares about marriage inequality either. Just because they don't explicitly say it out loud doesn't mean they care. They care about profits and market dominance only. If Google would make more money being anti same sex marriage, then they would most likely oppose same sex marriage and spend a lot of money on lobbying for the opposing view.

I'm certain that firing Brendan was probably one of the worst decisions Mozilla has taken so far. I trust Brave and Brendan far more on privacy issue since they only care about that and don't shove woke politics onto my face. I'm convinced that Brave will be larger than Firefox in market share sooner rather than later mostly because of this reason alone.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#79

Post by smichel17 »

gruez wrote: post #58
Causality1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which sadly includes me these days, since it's such a pain to run multiple versions of Firefox and there are legacy extensions I can't do without for some things.

What are these features that are built into chrome, but only available as legacy Firefox extensions?

I interpreted the comment to mean, they run old FF (with extensions) alongside chrome (incompatible), because they don't want to run two versions of FF. I don't quite understand this either, but it makes more sense than the other interpretation, I think.

Re: Mozilla’s plan to fix internet privacy

#80

Post by Vinnl »

anonymousab wrote: post #66
satya71 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of those browsers tracks everything you do if you sign-in, the other does it only to increase retention, not to track your activities. Guess which is which?

It would be better not to do [questionable thing] than to do it at all. I don't particularly care whether nagware functionality is benign or not.

A common complaint with Firefox was that you couldn't sync between devices - even though that was perfectly possible! But apparently, people had a hard time finding the functionality.

You might not consider that use case important, but I wouldn't call it questionable.

Post reply on HN