5 ms·

So you are one of those that "Open Web" == performance only and you look the other way on things like EME, Pocket, and various other things that lower Privacy a

by syshum 9y ago

So you are one of those that "Open Web" == performance only and you look the other way on things like EME, Pocket, and various other things that lower Privacy and betray the very foundation of the "Open Web"

noncoml 9y ago
That's as a bit unfair conclusion. I just believe that if Firefox dies then for sure "Open Web" will die. But, yeah, of course I am not happy with Pocket. But it still better than using Chrome.
- jopsen 9y ago
  Curious what is the concern with pocket?
  - noncoml 9y ago
    It's troubled past and weird current state, doesn't make me comfortable with sharing any info that Mozilla shares with them.
    - nnethercote 9y ago
      Mozilla acquired Pocket a while back. So "shares with them" really means "shares with itself" :)
      - syshum 9y ago
        1. It was 7 mos ago, I do not consider that "Awhile Back" 2. Mozilla Inc acquired it as a Commercial Proprietary Venture, not as a Open Source project under the Mozilla Foundation the non-profit 3. While it is Owned by Mozilla Inc, it of operated as a Separate Commercial Company separate from the Non-Profit so no it is "shares with it self" 4. The integration occurred long before the acquisition
  - bigbugbag 9y ago
    Here are some examples: Proprietary, got integrated into firefox for no apparent reason (hard to disable), had a security breach and privacy issue, got bought by mozilla for an undisclosed sum (millions), promises to open source have only been promises so far, acquisition turned to have been more a bout buying the 10 millions user base to get into mobile and 1 billion entries to feed to the upcoming recommendation engine.
    - gkya 9y ago
      This is basically an anti-vaxx-ish comment. Open sourcing propritary software is not easy, and IDK how you come to that last conclusion if yours that you're pushing all over the place. When pocket first appeared in FF, I was mad, but when Mozilla bought it I thought I could finally use the thing.
- Karunamon 9y ago
  At the risk of huge levels of snark, if the "open web" dies because Firefox dies (already a bit player in the browser wars, 11%ish), it was suicide, not murder.
- SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
  One of the big issues I have with Pocket isn't even the privacy problem, it's the integration. Firefox would (IMO) be better served by having such things as extensions included in the default distribution. They could even make a separate tab in the extensions dialogue for them, perhaps hidden behind an about:config preference. That way anyone who doesn't want them could disable them and speed the browser up. There was some discussion of doing things this way back when it was still called Phoenix. The Seamonkey suite was bloated and slow, Phoenix was the stripped-down browser that just did web browsing but had an extension system to add in extra features. But instead of adding features through the extension system the Mozilla team decided to add them into the base.
  - Manishearth 9y ago
    Most firefox UI code is lazy loaded, and the pocket extension was a pretty simple thing that hit an endpoint. I doubt you could speed things up by removing it.
    - bigbugbag 9y ago
      of course you speed things up, it takes a bit of time to go through the process of removing the icon and disabling it on a fresh install. when you have several install to do, it quickly adds up.
      - Manishearth 9y ago
        I'm talking about the GP's comment that disabling Pocket will speed up the browser.
- syshum 9y ago
  I believe the Open Web died as soon as they Caved to MS/Google on DRM, and choose to oppose the EFF in their battle to prevent DRM in becoming a standard. Mozilla is now an enemy of the Open Web, the EFF is one of the last organizations left actually standing up for the Open Web. Mozilla is just another Commercial Browser with anti-user features To be clear I am not laying all the blame at the feet of Mozilla, clearly the Open Web is not an important issue, as even in Linux circles there are countless people that have chosen Google over freedom, making endless excuses and justifications about why choosing chrome was just pragmatic but in making that "pragmatic" choice they sent a clear market signal that performance and netflix was more important the Open web, privacy, and user freedom. They sent a clear market signal to Mozilla that principles do not matter, and Mozilla took that market signal to heart and turned its back on the Principles of the Open web and privacy to focus more on Performance and Usability to appease those users
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    So, what would you do to oppose, say, EME? What cost would you be willing to pay? Would you be OK with, for example, some number of people being badly injured or possibly dying if it would guarantee a permanent end to DRM? How many people? This is not hyperbole, by the way: when you adopt the sort of you-agree-with-me-completely-or-you're-my-enemy rhetoric you're using here, well, people's lives are what you're saying you're willing to sacrifice. Mozilla could have taken a suicidal stand on principle, and I guarantee it would have hurt a significant number of people, and possibly led to lives lost (through joblessness, through emboldened powerful interests flush with victory over an all-in opposition, through any number of mechanisms). So. How many human lives would it be worth to you to get EME out of browsers?
    - AndrewCHM 9y ago
      And strengthening the stranglehold of copyright holders, doesn't help them ruin lives in a similar way through court systems?
- bigbugbag 9y ago
  Turns out there are alternatives to chrome other than firefox. even open source ones.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bad_user 9y ago
I personally love Pocket, it's my bookmarking service and I'm a paying customer. And staying true to their mission, Mozilla bought Pocket and is now releasing it as open source [1]. You're speaking of "betraying the foundation of the Open Web", but Mozilla is the only one out of the big players that isn't guilty of betrayal, the only big player that tried opposing patent encumbered video codecs or DRM, that have been promoted by Google, Microsoft and Apple, the W3C being basically a charade. If you're upset of W3C EME, your anger should be directed at the parties responsible for it, which are Google, Microsoft and Netflix and which now control the industry, with a majority market share I might add, which would make all resistance moot. So I hope you're boycotting Google, Microsoft and Netflix, because otherwise it's unfair to expect that from Mozilla, an organization with a responsibility towards its employees, users and customers. [1] https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-pocket/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-po...
- syshum 9y ago
  >>and is now releasing it as open source I will believe that when I see the code. 7 months now still no code, and outside of the single blog post no other comments from Pocket, Read It later, or Mozilla has given any indication they will Open Source it. In fact Read It Later is still a for profit corporations operating as a subsidiary of the For Profit Mozilla Corporation, not the Mozilla Foundation the non-profit organizations >Mozilla is the only one out of the big players that isn't guilty of betrayal, the only big player that tried opposing patent encumbered video codecs or DRM They did... When??? >If you're upset of W3C EME, your anger should be directed at the parties responsible for it, which are Google, Microsoft and Netflix I can be upset with W3c, Netflix, Google, Microsoft and at the same time be upset with Mozilla. I am more upset with Mozilla because they are a Non-Profit organization that had (and I stress Had) a mission to promoting Open Standards, Open Web, and User Privacy. They have turned their back on that when those issues became less popular than performance. They turned their back on those principles because market share. They have stopped attempting to education the public on why they should care about EME, about privacy, about anything really. I find it sad that Mozilla is no longer a leader creating conversations about why the Open Web is needed for Society, about way Standing up for Privacy and User Freedom is important. Instead they have choosen to play follow the Leader to MS and Google. Where is the 1990's Mozilla when Microsoft wanted to maket Active X a Standard and they stood up and said NO Where is the 2000's Mozilla when w3c wanted to drop HTML in favor of XHTML and they formed WHATWG to force the W3C in to adopting HTML5 we have today. Where did the Leader in the open Web go? Where did Mozilla go and what is this abomination that replace it?

by syshum 9y ago

noncoml 9y ago

That's as a bit unfair conclusion. I just believe that if Firefox dies then for sure "Open Web" will die. But, yeah, of course I am not happy with Pocket. But it still better than using Chrome.

jopsen 9y ago
Curious what is the concern with pocket?
- noncoml 9y ago
  It's troubled past and weird current state, doesn't make me comfortable with sharing any info that Mozilla shares with them.
  - nnethercote 9y ago
    Mozilla acquired Pocket a while back. So "shares with them" really means "shares with itself" :)
    - syshum 9y ago
      1. It was 7 mos ago, I do not consider that "Awhile Back" 2. Mozilla Inc acquired it as a Commercial Proprietary Venture, not as a Open Source project under the Mozilla Foundation the non-profit 3. While it is Owned by Mozilla Inc, it of operated as a Separate Commercial Company separate from the Non-Profit so no it is "shares with it self" 4. The integration occurred long before the acquisition
- bigbugbag 9y ago
  Here are some examples: Proprietary, got integrated into firefox for no apparent reason (hard to disable), had a security breach and privacy issue, got bought by mozilla for an undisclosed sum (millions), promises to open source have only been promises so far, acquisition turned to have been more a bout buying the 10 millions user base to get into mobile and 1 billion entries to feed to the upcoming recommendation engine.
  - gkya 9y ago
    This is basically an anti-vaxx-ish comment. Open sourcing propritary software is not easy, and IDK how you come to that last conclusion if yours that you're pushing all over the place. When pocket first appeared in FF, I was mad, but when Mozilla bought it I thought I could finally use the thing.
Karunamon 9y ago
At the risk of huge levels of snark, if the "open web" dies because Firefox dies (already a bit player in the browser wars, 11%ish), it was suicide, not murder.
SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
One of the big issues I have with Pocket isn't even the privacy problem, it's the integration. Firefox would (IMO) be better served by having such things as extensions included in the default distribution. They could even make a separate tab in the extensions dialogue for them, perhaps hidden behind an about:config preference. That way anyone who doesn't want them could disable them and speed the browser up. There was some discussion of doing things this way back when it was still called Phoenix. The Seamonkey suite was bloated and slow, Phoenix was the stripped-down browser that just did web browsing but had an extension system to add in extra features. But instead of adding features through the extension system the Mozilla team decided to add them into the base.
- Manishearth 9y ago
  Most firefox UI code is lazy loaded, and the pocket extension was a pretty simple thing that hit an endpoint. I doubt you could speed things up by removing it.
  - bigbugbag 9y ago
    of course you speed things up, it takes a bit of time to go through the process of removing the icon and disabling it on a fresh install. when you have several install to do, it quickly adds up.
    - Manishearth 9y ago
      I'm talking about the GP's comment that disabling Pocket will speed up the browser.
syshum 9y ago
I believe the Open Web died as soon as they Caved to MS/Google on DRM, and choose to oppose the EFF in their battle to prevent DRM in becoming a standard. Mozilla is now an enemy of the Open Web, the EFF is one of the last organizations left actually standing up for the Open Web. Mozilla is just another Commercial Browser with anti-user features To be clear I am not laying all the blame at the feet of Mozilla, clearly the Open Web is not an important issue, as even in Linux circles there are countless people that have chosen Google over freedom, making endless excuses and justifications about why choosing chrome was just pragmatic but in making that "pragmatic" choice they sent a clear market signal that performance and netflix was more important the Open web, privacy, and user freedom. They sent a clear market signal to Mozilla that principles do not matter, and Mozilla took that market signal to heart and turned its back on the Principles of the Open web and privacy to focus more on Performance and Usability to appease those users
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  So, what would you do to oppose, say, EME? What cost would you be willing to pay? Would you be OK with, for example, some number of people being badly injured or possibly dying if it would guarantee a permanent end to DRM? How many people? This is not hyperbole, by the way: when you adopt the sort of you-agree-with-me-completely-or-you're-my-enemy rhetoric you're using here, well, people's lives are what you're saying you're willing to sacrifice. Mozilla could have taken a suicidal stand on principle, and I guarantee it would have hurt a significant number of people, and possibly led to lives lost (through joblessness, through emboldened powerful interests flush with victory over an all-in opposition, through any number of mechanisms). So. How many human lives would it be worth to you to get EME out of browsers?
  - AndrewCHM 9y ago
    And strengthening the stranglehold of copyright holders, doesn't help them ruin lives in a similar way through court systems?
bigbugbag 9y ago
Turns out there are alternatives to chrome other than firefox. even open source ones.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

bad_user 9y ago

I personally love Pocket, it's my bookmarking service and I'm a paying customer. And staying true to their mission, Mozilla bought Pocket and is now releasing it as open source [1]. You're speaking of "betraying the foundation of the Open Web", but Mozilla is the only one out of the big players that isn't guilty of betrayal, the only big player that tried opposing patent encumbered video codecs or DRM, that have been promoted by Google, Microsoft and Apple, the W3C being basically a charade. If you're upset of W3C EME, your anger should be directed at the parties responsible for it, which are Google, Microsoft and Netflix and which now control the industry, with a majority market share I might add, which would make all resistance moot. So I hope you're boycotting Google, Microsoft and Netflix, because otherwise it's unfair to expect that from Mozilla, an organization with a responsibility towards its employees, users and customers. [1] https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-pocket/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/02/27/mozilla-acquires-po...

syshum 9y ago
>>and is now releasing it as open source I will believe that when I see the code. 7 months now still no code, and outside of the single blog post no other comments from Pocket, Read It later, or Mozilla has given any indication they will Open Source it. In fact Read It Later is still a for profit corporations operating as a subsidiary of the For Profit Mozilla Corporation, not the Mozilla Foundation the non-profit organizations >Mozilla is the only one out of the big players that isn't guilty of betrayal, the only big player that tried opposing patent encumbered video codecs or DRM They did... When??? >If you're upset of W3C EME, your anger should be directed at the parties responsible for it, which are Google, Microsoft and Netflix I can be upset with W3c, Netflix, Google, Microsoft and at the same time be upset with Mozilla. I am more upset with Mozilla because they are a Non-Profit organization that had (and I stress Had) a mission to promoting Open Standards, Open Web, and User Privacy. They have turned their back on that when those issues became less popular than performance. They turned their back on those principles because market share. They have stopped attempting to education the public on why they should care about EME, about privacy, about anything really. I find it sad that Mozilla is no longer a leader creating conversations about why the Open Web is needed for Society, about way Standing up for Privacy and User Freedom is important. Instead they have choosen to play follow the Leader to MS and Google. Where is the 1990's Mozilla when Microsoft wanted to maket Active X a Standard and they stood up and said NO Where is the 2000's Mozilla when w3c wanted to drop HTML in favor of XHTML and they formed WHATWG to force the W3C in to adopting HTML5 we have today. Where did the Leader in the open Web go? Where did Mozilla go and what is this abomination that replace it?