• Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So is it safe to assume that alternate builds of Firefox (Pale Moon et al) will be probably removing that “feature” ?

  • Deceptichum@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Mozilla pays its CEOs millions and millions of dollars. They exist to get funding from Chrome to look like there is competition in the industry.

  • uzay@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Default Firefox is becoming more and more unusable. I hope distros will start switching to something like Librewolf as the default browser in the future or heavily (and visibly) change the default Firefox config themselves.

  • Zwiebel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Explaination from the article:

    The way it works is that individual browsers report their behavior to a data aggregation server (operated by Mozilla), then that server reports the aggregated data to an advertiser’s server. The “advertising network” only receives aggregated data with differential privacy, but the aggregation server still knows the behavior of individual browsers!

  • hummingbird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Sad to see Mozilla being managed into the ground, betraying their principles and selling their users.

  • chip@feddit.rocks
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I had my doubts reading that Ladybird browser announcement, but more and more I’m thinking that Mozilla is desperately chasing the gravy train that has long departed with their sugar daddy (google) laughing all the way to the horizon.

    • hotpot8toe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Meta bad!!! Wait until you realise that React is built by Meta. Are you gonna stop using websites that is built on React?

      • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Programming languages isn’t adware made by a company that has horrible track records for respecting privacy. If you love Facebook so much, stay there and take your sealioning with you.

        • hotpot8toe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Super welcoming community here. Disagree with them they immediately want you out. Anyways, React is not a programming language, it’s a framework built on Javascript. My point was that hating on anything Meta built is stupid because they can build ok things

          • lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            “Hating on anything the Nazis did is stupid because they can build ok cars”

            Doing one ok thing doesn’t negate the fact that Meta is one of the most evil, unethical hellholes of a company. Anything they touch is absolutely rotten.

          • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’d rather not use products made by companies that influence voters and led to a genocide. Sorry I have moral standard.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          This is not sealioning lmao

          You’re falling into the trap where anyone who disagrees with you has some sort of ulterior motive or grand scheme. I don’t need to remind you why that is not a good thing.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I wish I could. Every time I hear about a React app, it’s some godforsaken ad choked nightmare of a “web 2.0” site that just makes the internet painful to use. I understand it may be possible to write a performant and usable GUI with it, but you never hear of such things

        • hotpot8toe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I mean it might not be the most performant. But I’ve build with React and it made it easier to build projects quickly. Regardless, my point wasn’t about React and if it’s good or bad. My point was that Meta can build a framework that’s not about collecting data. Sometimes they have other motives.

          Here I think the reason they are co-authoring this is to try to paralyze Google’s hold on personalized ads and user data. And probably reduce scrutiny of their data collecting actions in the sense that their new data collecting will be based on PPA if it goes mainstream.

        • tyler@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You’re literally using a website based on react technology right now. Lemmy is built on Inferno which is just an older version of React.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            No ads but horrible performance. How is it that a iPhone 15 Pro is too slow to run this web site reliably? Why can it not remember that I’m logged in, or worse, why does it sometimes remember I’m logged in, after deciding I’m not? Why does it use so much storage on my phone? Why does it sometimes get stuck trying to draw the Home Screen?

            I mean, it’s much better than Reddit was, and I try not to complain for the price, but it really seems like one of those things where it’s too ambitious and just doesn’t work as well for users. Maybe something simpler would be better

            • mrvictory1@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              why does it sometimes remember I’m logged in, after deciding I’m not

              I had that problem when Lemmy was under constant DDoS attacks, almost a year ago.

              iPhone 15 Pro is too slow to run this web site reliably

              You have both upvotes and downvotes so I will assume you are not the only one with these problems. In my experience Reddit website either glitches itself or glitches Safari every now and then.

              Why does it sometimes get stuck trying to draw the Home Screen

              Sounds like iOS issue, not Lemmy.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Web 2.0 was the mid-2000s idea that every website and service would be accessible via an http api and that it would allow easy integration. It was ads that killed Web 2.0, as users accessing a site via its api rather than its ad-filled website wouldn’t see any of those ads.

  • PenisWenisGenius@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Well shit. Firefox is still better because it doesn’t have the backdoor Google uses to catch and then block people using adblock on YouTube. For now.

  • CO5MO ✨@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    WTH, Mozilla 🤦🏼‍♀️

    Also, fuck you, dude:

    One Mozilla developer claimed that explaining PPA would be too challenging, so they had to opt users in by default.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      i read that as more like “nobody would opt in if it was opt-in”.

      • kbal@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        One Mozilla developer claimed that explaining PPA would be too challenging

        It’s not that difficult to explain. “When you visit the website of a participating advertiser whose ads you’ve seen, do you want us to tell them that someone saw their ads and visited their site, without telling them it was you? Y/N”

        But if they asked such a question almost all of the small fraction of users who bother to read the whole sentence would still see no good reason to want to participate. Coming up with one is that hard part. It requires some pretty fancy rationalizations. Firefox keeping track of which ads I’ve seen? No, thanks.

        If there was an option to make sure that advertisers whose ads I’ve blocked know that they got blocked, I might go for that.

        The writer apparently thinks that the previous Mozilla misstep into advertising land was the Mr. Robot thing six years ago, which seems to confirm my impression that this one is getting a bigger reaction than their other recent moves in this direction. We’ll see if the rest of the tech press picks it up. Maybe one day when the cumulative loss of users shows up more clearly in the telemetry they’ll reconsider.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      “You’re too dumb to understand so we make decisions for you”

      Fuck that condescending prick with a pineapple.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Chill; he’s probably not talking about you. He is talking about “your mom”. If you want her to use Firefox, it’s got to be simple.

        • Emerald@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          But this PPA stuff doesn’t need to be enabled by default. They are opting-in all Firefox users to something they don’t understand.

    • jabathekek@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think explaining a system like PPA would be a difficult task.

      IMO that just means they barely understand it themselves. Anyone that understands something with an amount of proficiency can explain it to child and it’ll make sense, given they don’t use technical nomenclature.

    • Dlolor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Alternatively you can do the same through Settings -> Privacy & Security -> Website Advertising Preferences and uncheck “Allow websites to perform privacy-preserving ad measurement”

      • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yup, but that’s already mentioned in the article. Thought I’d give people the exact userpref, so they can modify their custom user.js if they have one.

  • hotpot8toe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I mean people freaking out about this don’t actually understand what’s happening and why Mozilla is doing it. Mozilla is trying to build a new privacy-based advertising. The feature needs to be opt-in by default in order to have a chance to become mainstream. Forget about the technical details and whether the user understands what it is. Most people don’t change default settings. So they can never get websites to try this better technology if their own users aren’t adopting it.

    I also hate the attitude of this community they think Firefox is built for them(ultra tech savy, extremely privacy concious) when 99% of their users are not these things. If you want ultra privacy, go use Libreawolf or whatever. Those solutions are for that type of person. Firefox and Mozilla builds for the average person, which is why they correctly say that the user won’t understand the feature. (Anyone says otherwise is in a tech bubble and haven’t seen normal people interacting with their computers).

    • fin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      99% of their users are not these things

      I don’t think so. People using Firefox are freaking evangelists trying to spread privacy. And if Firefox should lose those people, it will truly be the end

      • hotpot8toe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        99% was referring to them not being both tech savy and extremely privacy conscious. I don’t disagree that the appeal of Firefox is better privacy. I just don’t think the average user is looking to absolutely remove every drop of data collected. I mean just look at the default Firefox homepage it comes with. It has sponsored shortcuts and sponsored stories. They put them there because the average user actually clicks on them. If everyone was privacy conscious like you say, they would turn off the feature and Firefox wouldn’t keep it because they don’t make money from it. But that’s obviously not the case.

        • Paradox@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          And these days, privacy is basically the only appeal of Firefox. It’s slower than chrome or webkit based browsers, hangs out with Safari in terms of standards support, and can’t hold a candle to either other browser when it comes to battery life. Why mozilla seems determined to throw that all away is beyond me

          • Feyd@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s slower than chrome or webkit based browsers, hangs out with Safari in terms of standards support, and can’t hold a candle to either other browser when it comes to battery life.

            Sources?

    • Don_alForno@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Privacy based advertizing:

      1. Develop ad

      2. Think about what websites your target demographic will probably frequent. (Be creative, dear marketing person! You can do it! This is the essence of what you’re getting paid for!)

      3. Pay those sites to display your ad

      Done.

      Forget about the technical details and whether the user understands what it is.

      No. Why? It’s simple. They are collecting data I don’t want the ad networks to have instead of the ad networks and give it to the ad networks. That’s only more private than the status quo if I’m okay with them to have this data and trust them to handle it responsibly. Which I have no reason to.

      which is why they correctly say that the user won’t understand the Feature.

      See explanation above. That’s not too complicated to explain to a person that managed to turn on the computer. It only gets complicated when you try to follow the mental gymnastics you need to think this feature adds privacy for anybody.

  • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    From the article, quoting a Firefox dev explaining the decision:

    @McCovican @jonny @mathew @RenewedRebecca Opt-in is only meaningful if users can make an informed decision. I think explaining a system like PPA would be a difficult task. And most users complain a lot about these types of interruption.

    In my opinion an easily discoverable opt-out option + blog posts and such were the right decision.

    puts on They Live glasses

    @McCovican @jonny @mathew @RenewedRebecca If we had made it opt in, then not a single human being on the planet would have enabled it, and we didn’t want that