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

701–710 of 1001 posts

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

#701

Post by iszomer »

sub7 wrote: post #315

If you're not blocking your mozilla process from accessing firefox.com, mozilla.com/.org, and mozgcp.net, as well as turning telemetry settings off after every update and keeping a tight policy.json file - then firefox is just as bad as Edge or Chrome re: tracking Also they actively take down extensions that unfuck websites without notice Nice picture-in-picture implementation tho

Append all Mozilla services and telemetry to Pi-hole? What are the other ways this can be quietly mitigated and, the possible workarounds to exceptions created by DoH?

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

#702

Post by weikju »

ta1243 wrote: post #693
m2f2 wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one of them 2.54% and I cringe when some kiddie develops websites around some chrome bugs, just to let us and Apple folks down.

I'm also the 2.54% and have been since the phoenix days. I am beyond thankful every day for apple keeping both desktop safari and ios running to prevent the internet being even more monoculture than in the IE6 days

> I am beyond thankful every day for apple keeping both desktop safari and ios running to prevent the internet being even more monoculture than in the IE6 days

Don't worry, EU regulators (and other countries soon I suppose) are doing their best to fix that "bug".

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

#703

Post by bloopernova »

sph wrote: post #590
MrAlex94 wrote: post #450

I might have differed with Brendan Eich on a few matters, but he was a good steward of Firefox in my book. When Mitchell Baker took the reins, Mozilla became rather more heavy-handed towards us - the irony being that Waterfox was once proudly displayed on the Mozilla website under their "Powered By" banner. I appreciate the constant existential wobble Firefox faces, but they've made some peculiar decisions as of late…

Here's my question: in light of what Mozilla is doing, why don't other forks like Waterfox or Librewolf write a manifesto/contract saying they'll never sell your user data and won't turn "evil" (until they do, of course), and then decide to offer a paid version of their browser. Two possible outcomes: 1. No one cares. No one pays for it. Nothing changes and nobody loses anything. 2. Enough people pay for it to keep t…

Kagi's Orion browser has a lifetime sponsor price of $150. That plus the Kagi subscription support its development.

It's currently macOS and iPad/iPhone only, but a Linux version is being worked on. I don't know their plans for a Windows version.

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

#705

Post by weikju »

DaSHacka wrote: post #629
dheerajvs wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main question for me is can ungoogled Chromium run uBlock Origin?

Yes, it's just a downstream fork of chromium. It can run any extension that runs on the equivalent upstream build of chromium. For the same reasons you can install it on Librewolf too, and it actually comes with ublock origin pre-installed.

> Yes, it's just a downstream fork of chromium. It can run any extension that runs on the equivalent upstream build of chromium.

Therefore, no, it cannot run uBlock Origin, or soon will be unable to run it.

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

#706

Post by Batman8675309 »

einr wrote: post #683
KingOfCoders wrote: post #678

Windows user, 32 years FF user (Mosaic, Netscape, Firefox), what to do now? Anyone forking? (I don't want a derivate which Mozilla controls) [edit] Switched to Waterfox (Macos, Windows, Linux, Android), no fork but better than FF for now

Firefox forks: * Waterfox * Librewolf * GNU IceCat * Pale Moon * Seamonkey Chromium forks: * Ungoogled-Chromium * Thorium * Iridium You'll have to do your own due diligence as far as how trustworthy or suitable these are, but nominally privacy-respecting alternatives do exist.

Thorium is regularly 3 months behind on updates

Iridium brings me to a 404 when I try to download it for MacOS

Sadly, neither seem like good options.

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

#707

Post by einr »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #698
einr wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox forks: * Waterfox * Librewolf * GNU IceCat * Pale Moon * Seamonkey Chromium forks: * Ungoogled-Chromium * Thorium * Iridium You'll have to do your own due diligence as far as how trustworthy or suitable these are, but nominally privacy-respecting alternatives do exist.

Thanks didn't know, thought Waterfox etc. were just a new UI on top of Firefox rendering/HTTP/HTTPS/etc. engine and were depending on Firefox development. Didn't know they were forks like the Redis forks for example. Will take another look. "Ungoogled-Chromium" Can't be a fork? Don't they just patch Chromium?

I mean I guess that depends on what you mean by fork? Most of the above projects follow upstream Firefox/Chromium (Pale Moon, for example, doesn't -- but that also means less support for recent web standards) but they are forks in the sense that they maintain the codebase/patchset themselves. How much they actually diverge from upstream varies by project.

So you're right that they are dependent on Mozilla for now. With Mozilla circling the drain lately, maybe that could change. But right now, for the purposes of removing privacy-unfriendly antifeatures, I find them sufficiently independent for my purposes. Most Firefox code isn't evil.

If you want something like Firefox but you're adamant that Mozilla can exercise no control over it, Pale Moon is probably the one you want to look at.

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

#708

Post by einr »

Batman8675309 wrote: post #706
einr wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox forks: * Waterfox * Librewolf * GNU IceCat * Pale Moon * Seamonkey Chromium forks: * Ungoogled-Chromium * Thorium * Iridium You'll have to do your own due diligence as far as how trustworthy or suitable these are, but nominally privacy-respecting alternatives do exist.

Thorium is regularly 3 months behind on updates Iridium brings me to a 404 when I try to download it for MacOS Sadly, neither seem like good options.

Thorium is regularly 3 months behind on updates

Unfortunate, I suppose, but this is the kind of tradeoff that is to be expected when switching to something maintained by one guy in their bedroom instead of a megacorp.

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

#709

Post by CjHuber »

immibis wrote: post #625
dizhn wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That bit pretty much sounds like "by using the software you're agreeing to whatever"

No it doesn't. Most businesses finish that sentence with "...for any purpose" not "... to help you navigate the web" It will still be interpreted to mean "...for any purpose" by Mozilla somehow.

For me it sounds similar to Google‘s phrasing that they use to make people activate personalized ads: „used to deliver better, more helpful experiences“

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

#710

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

amelius wrote: post #664
rich_sasha wrote: post #382

It's all so strange. I would happily buy Firefox, either as a one off, or as an annual license, and be done with all the weird license nonsense - presumably they want to sell data to pay the bills. But instead the choice, realistically, seems to be between giving all my browsing data to Google and to Mozilla. And Chrome works marginally better... :/

> presumably they want to sell data to pay the bills. Can't the EU just sponsor Firefox?

That's the surest way to kill it, and that is before taking their recent anti-privacy policies into consideration.
Post reply on HN