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

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by account42 »

gunsle wrote: post #965
KingOfCoders wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They got more than $7B to build a browser. "I appreciate the constant existential wobble Firefox faces" I would also love to face $7B existential wobbles.

Yeah Mozilla at this point is really like the kid riding the bike and putting a stick in his own front tire meme. I had an interview with them years ago and even then it was clear they were wasting time on the most pointless bureaucracy while Firefox was languishing. Doesn’t google literally give them millions a year to exist? Like idk if I can even think of something more mismanaged than Mozilla.

Wikimedia tries but despite their best efforts Wikipedia is still unrivaled.

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

#982

Post by account42 »

Y_Y wrote: post #913
bluGill wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More importantly that fork should be what other forks base off of. Anyone can put a skin on a browser, but someone needs to do the engine. If every fork who wants an engine improvement goes to the one place there is some mass behind making the fork real, and the other forks can still to their skin if they think it useful. That one fork also means that when mozilla comes out with a new version there are enough hands t…

What about Servo? That's coming along and already has a company/coop behind it. https://blogs.igalia.com/mrego/servo-revival-2023-2024/

> and already has a company/coop behind it

Considering what has happened to Firefox, that's not encouraging.

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

#983

Post by account42 »

bluGill wrote: post #749
stateoff wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree. The blog post is claiming the opposite to what their ToS is granting - but one is fluff (that will be forgotten soon) while the other is legally binding. I cannot imagine applications like browsers that would require such an unrestricted license for user input just to do its service. That clearly indicates some "other" future motive that is underlined by the notion to remove the FAQ entry and other…

The blog does come from company officials and so you can show it to a judge and state "this is how you should interpret their ToS". It will be harder than if the ToS was clear, but the judge on seeing the ToS and blog differ is likely to come down hard to Mozilla for creating this situation. But you also need a good (expensive) lawyer to pull this off.

Even with a lawyer it's still a gamble if you will win - and in either case, the damage will have been done by then and no monetary compensation will undo it.

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

#984

Post by account42 »

lost_womble wrote: post #751
walrus01 wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on this, Firefox has a 2.54% market share of browsers worldwide, so if their goal here is to shoot themselves in the foot and get that number under 2%, mission accomplished. Firefox is still the lesser of two evils when compared to Chrome with all of its telemetry turned on. And at least it supports a proper implementation of uBlock origin, which Google just broke in Chrome. https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-m…

This is such a bad way to look at Firefox browser share. Instead, look at desktop share worldwide, where it's more like 7%.

This is quibbling over details - both numbers are already low enough that many developers won't even bother to test on FF not to mention fix non-trivial issues, and for both stats the trend is clearly downwards.

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

#985

Post by account42 »

kbenson wrote: post #166
jcranmer wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judging from nearby wording, this is primarily geared towards the Firefox account stuff as opposed to the Firefox browser. (I'm not happy with Mozilla's decision to name everything Firefox, it makes things like this confusing.)

Yes, it seems like Mozilla has long had a problem of marketing getting in the way of communication. This keeps happening over and over gain. They make changes for marketing reasons, and then people are confused when they make policy changes because they've solidified their naming so much in the pursuit of brand recognition that their audience (rightly) is confused about what they're actually saying when they use that…

Is the audience confused though or is the text simply ambiguous and thus should be interpreted defensively.

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

#986

Post by ksec »

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 hate to say this but I am again surprised not by the ToS update from Mozilla but by the people who are surprised that Firefox or Mozilla is doing this.

May be I am way too cynical than average people. What is being stated here is actually inline of what they think is right. They think watching Porn is wrong. Which is why you shouldn't use Firefox to watch porn, or anything else they deemed wrong.

And that is speaking from someone who joined the Firefox 1.0 New York Times Ad.

I guess we will all have to do it again. This time for Ladybird.

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

#987

Post by account42 »

matsemann wrote: post #444
_mitterpach wrote: post #366

Link directly to the Github commit: https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b... , which links to the following issue: https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/issues/16016 There are a bunch of locked Google docs linked in the issue, probably internal privacy guidelines. I can't say that this surprises me, perhaps they are looking for alternate revenue streams in case Google cuts them out? To HN: Will yo…

> To HN: Will you be quitting firefox over this change, or is there simply no better place to leave for? Not to be overly whataboutistic, but we tolerate sooo much more from other players. It's annoying how we hold some to a higher standard, but ignore others doing worse. I get people are disappointed in Mozilla and wants them to do better, but it's a bit like the "we live in a society meme", where those doing good m…

> Not to be overly whataboutistic, but we tolerate sooo much more from other players. It's annoying how we hold some to a higher standard, but ignore others doing worse.

Who is "we"? It certainly doesn't include me.

Someone who tries to gain your trust only to betray it gets a stronger reaction than a known bad actor doing what they are known for? Color me surprised.

> I get people are disappointed in Mozilla and wants them to do better, but it's a bit like the "we live in a society meme", where those doing good must be perfect or else

You are talking like mozilla made a mistake. Yet their response was not to apologize but to claim people are just confused.

How much shit can Mozilla pull before people are allowed to say enough is enough?

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

#988

Post by account42 »

KingMob wrote: post #499
akimbostrawman wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have long left the sinking ship and switched to enshitified and actually private https://librewolf.net/

Which will go under within a few years of FF dying. (Yes, the current code may still work, but the web will move on without it.)

Will FF die though or will it be released from mismanagement when Mozilla finally goes under.

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

#989

Post by account42 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #451

Debian feature request: A system-wide switch to disable all telemetry and "cloud integration" features that make any network connection to the developers' or developers' partners' servers, applied to all software distributed in the official repositories.

Surely you mean a systemwide switch you can optionally enable to allow programs to send telemetry.

Or just disable it altogether because there is no real user benefit.

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

#990

Post by account42 »

roenxi wrote: post #496
7373737373 wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's time for distributions to only include browsers developed by non-profits

If Debian could just stick to free software that'd be grand. It is a good ideology and there is no need to change it. Introducing ideological confusion is one of the paths to organisational rot.

Debian already doesn't just stick to free software. Let's say I have a program in debain's main repos. Suppose tomorrow I release a new version that uploads all your data (including shitcoin vallets ant passwords) to my server. All fully open source of course. Do you think Debian should include this update? Does rejecting it cause ideological confusion?
Post reply on HN