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

971–980 of 1001 posts

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

#971

Post by akimbostrawman »

ac130kz wrote: post #758
akimbostrawman wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which decisions? LibreWolf ist exactly that + hardening used in tor browser maybe you mean those but all of them you can change in setting.

Like I need to watch DRM for my job, and it doesn't work at all. I also already ported most of their configs that I actually researched each and every line of myself + Waterfox + Arkenfox's configs into my generic Mozilla Firefox, and it works great.

There is literally a "enable DRM" setting (might also need disable resist fingerprint). Also librewolf is almost 1:1 with arkenfox.

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

#972

Post by amiga386 »

einsteinx2 wrote: post #748
amiga386 wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is easy to block network access (never plug ethernet) Some TVs secretly include a modem and SIM card, to make sure they get your personal data back to their masters. Every company in the world is coming after your privacy. How far are you willing to defend it?

> Some TVs secretly include a modem and SIM card, to make sure they get your personal data back to their masters. That’s a pretty wild accusation to make without naming even a single brand or model… > Every company in the world is coming after your privacy. This is clearly true though.

I was sure I had seen an example of someone revealing this several years ago, but I can't find the article again, so it's probably misinformation. I'm sorry for repeating it.

There are definitely "spy" TVs modified by state security groups that do this, but that's not what I was claiming.

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

#973

Post by account42 »

jaharios wrote: post #926
sunshine-o wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either their legal team made a mistake, in which case they should correct it and issue an apology ASAP I don't think it is a mistake but more the translation of a vision and strategy that took hundreds of meetings to be laid down very precisely. I have nothing to back what I am gonna say but I am wondering if their strategy might be to truly become the default browser of governments who are uncomfortable having Chr…

I think Baker is now gone gone. https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-leadership-growt...

That doesn't guarantee that the new leadership will be any better. A good first step would be cutting down leadership compensation to sane levels.

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

#974

Post by account42 »

Spivak wrote: post #181
Mistletoe wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are under an attack by Puritanism that is quite astounding actually. And no one is doing anything. Everyone just keeps bending the knee. https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1hqqpbt/newest_ver... Some of the things that are happening are just from the threat of “something bad might come down from the new administration”. It’s so ridiculous.

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…

It's not any more surreal than the extreme shift in the other direction we had before. If anything, what you are experiencing now is just the expecte (over)correction to that.

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

#975

Post by account42 »

_zagj wrote: post #319
tokioyoyo wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My conspiracy theory is that gears are slowly turning to revamp the culture, redefine what’s acceptable/not acceptable and eventually suggest that if you won’t have kids you’re not accepted in the society. Basically a funky way to reverse the population decline, as the governments are realizing this problem won’t be fixed by free markets and etc.

People aren't having kids because of stagnant real wages and soaring home prices. In the US, the median home price is now $450k. In Canada, it's $650k . And when people do have children, they're on average having fewer, later in life (with a greater risk of complications): https://www.northwell.edu/news/the-latest/geriatric-pregnanc... I doubt banning porn or abortion or engaging in cultural engineering will fix this…

> People aren't having kids because of stagnant real wages and soaring home prices.

That's proably a non-insiginficant factor but unlikely to be the only one. Poorer people have never had problems reproducing in any society.

I think media exposure plays a much bigger part. Not porn exactly, but anything that glorifies a "free" lifestyle over settling down.

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

#976

Post by account42 »

ryandrake wrote: post #289
tokioyoyo wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My conspiracy theory is that gears are slowly turning to revamp the culture, redefine what’s acceptable/not acceptable and eventually suggest that if you won’t have kids you’re not accepted in the society. Basically a funky way to reverse the population decline, as the governments are realizing this problem won’t be fixed by free markets and etc.

It seems like not so much a conspiracy theory as something totally transparent and out in the open. There's a huge political push to birth as many babies as possible. Major political parties have it as part of their platform. Their spokespeople talk derisively of "childless cat ladies" and how you're not a real contributor to society unless you produce babies. The "Birth" lobby is a stool composed of several legs: 1.…

Now consider that perhaps the current state is the result of a similar conspiracy but in the other direction.

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

#977

Post by account42 »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #381
userbinator wrote: post #151

The other WTF is here: Your use of Firefox must follow Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy, and you agree that you will not use Firefox to infringe anyone’s rights or violate any applicable laws or regulations. Acceptable Use Policy links to https://www.mozilla.org/about/legal/acceptable-use/ which says "You may not use any of Mozilla’s services to[...]Upload, download, transmit, display, or grant access to content that…

> I recommend switching to an alternative browser which is only a browser, like Dillo, Ladybird, or Netsurf. Did not know any of those alternatives thanks for sharing. After a quick online search, I see they could work for casual browsing and it's great that they don't rely on Chromium But do you think these can be a full browser replacement without extension ecosystems like ublock origin et al.?

None of these three are currently suitable for casual browsing unfortunately.

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

#978

Post by account42 »

knowitnone wrote: post #864
haswell wrote: post #856

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also Firefox forks such as WaterFox, LibreWolf and Floorp. These seem like a more direct migration path for someone wanting to move off of Firefox.

I'm using LibreWolf for a few days. Only annoyance I've found is zooming in on a site(HN) does not stick. I'm pretty sure I don't have to zoom all the time on Firefox or Chrome.

I'd consider that a feature.

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

#979

Post by account42 »

msh wrote: post #953
userbinator wrote: post #151

The other WTF is here: Your use of Firefox must follow Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy, and you agree that you will not use Firefox to infringe anyone’s rights or violate any applicable laws or regulations. Acceptable Use Policy links to https://www.mozilla.org/about/legal/acceptable-use/ which says "You may not use any of Mozilla’s services to[...]Upload, download, transmit, display, or grant access to content that…

By the wording here there are many Netflix shows you could not watch using Firefox.

Why would you want to watch TV in your browser in the first place?

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

#980

Post by account42 »

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…

> I should point out, it seems daft to me when others suggest using forks with no well-established governance of their own, essentially shifting trust from an organisation at least answerable to certain regulations, to individuals with no proper framework or guidelines.

That just shows that trust in Mozilla has sunk below "random stranger" levels. IMO that shift is entirely deserved.

Post reply on HN