4 ms·

Not sure how true that is anymore. They seem to by trying hard to squander their reputation. First their MITI officially signaled they now consider themselves a

Not sure how true that is anymore. They seem to by trying hard to squander their reputation. First their MITI officially signaled they now consider themselves a political force, then the whole Cliqz debacle following shortly after showed their willingness to sacrifice their principles.

floatingatoll 9y ago
What's MITI stand for here?
- programmarchy 9y ago
  Mozilla Information Trust Initiative
6a68 9y ago
I dunno about all that :-) MITI is Mozilla trying to keep the internet credible as a source of news and information. This is in keeping with Mozilla's core principles. Give the blog post a careful read, as it might change your mind: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/08/08/mozilla-information-trust-initiative-building-movement-fight-misinformation-online/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/08/08/mozilla-information... Re: Cliqz, working with a search-oriented company might be a way that Mozilla can help avoid monopolies in search. The goal is to find new ways to keep the web open, so that new challengers have a level playing field vs. dominant companies. Andreas wrote a good blog post about the worrying monopolistic trends in search a couple years ago: https://andreasgal.com/2015/03/30/data-is-at-the-heart-of-search-but-who-has-access-to-it/ https://andreasgal.com/2015/03/30/data-is-at-the-heart-of-se... Edited to add: Cliqz is a very privacy-conscious company, and I think that respect for the user was a major factor in Mozilla partnering with Cliqz. This is just to say that, AIUI, the partnership was evaluated, again, in keeping with Mozilla's principles. Also, here's the Mozilla manifesto, which documents those guiding principles: https://www.mozilla.org/about/manifesto/ https://www.mozilla.org/about/manifesto/
superkuh 9y ago
Don't forget their switch to a walled garden for extensions in order to protect users from themselves.
- sf_rob 9y ago
  Power users can use unsigned add-ons in Dev Edition. Regular users would be exploited by any middle ground solution in the main release. It's unfortunate the web is a dangerous place for the average user.
  - superkuh 9y ago
    Asking people to use beta as a main driver is part of the reason why people think, >They seem to by trying hard to squander their reputation. The other part of it is Mozilla building the browser for the lowest common denominator at the price of user control.
- soapdog 9y ago
  That is FUD and also a lie. You can still distribute your extensions on whatever site you want, you just need to sign them on AMO. The workflow is: 1 - Build webextension 2 - Upload to AMO 3 - Choose "distribute on AMO" or "sign and distribute on your site"
  - superkuh 9y ago
    If I need to get Mozilla's approval before I can run code in the browser running on my machine then I see a wall. That they've automated it so much as to mitigate the protection a walled garden normally gives almost makes it worse.
    - chungy 9y ago
      You can install Firefox Beta or Nightly and have unrestricted extension installation options (or use a Linux distro's packages: most of such firefox packages do not require signed extensions). It's a measure to prevent casual trojans, there are many ways around it for non-casuals and developers to employ.
arjie 9y ago
How is Mozilla been ever anything but a political force? Like 12 years ago, when Firefox came out, it was accompanied by probably the largest marketing campaign for an open project barring Wikipedia. They followed that up with some ten years of "web standards! web standards! open web standards!". This is the game Mozilla plays. That's why they won on the web: everyone does it their way now, even if their browser isn't dominant.

floatingatoll 9y ago

What's MITI stand for here?

programmarchy 9y ago
Mozilla Information Trust Initiative

6a68 9y ago

I dunno about all that :-) MITI is Mozilla trying to keep the internet credible as a source of news and information. This is in keeping with Mozilla's core principles. Give the blog post a careful read, as it might change your mind: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/08/08/mozilla-information-trust-initiative-building-movement-fight-misinformation-online/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/08/08/mozilla-information... Re: Cliqz, working with a search-oriented company might be a way that Mozilla can help avoid monopolies in search. The goal is to find new ways to keep the web open, so that new challengers have a level playing field vs. dominant companies. Andreas wrote a good blog post about the worrying monopolistic trends in search a couple years ago: https://andreasgal.com/2015/03/30/data-is-at-the-heart-of-search-but-who-has-access-to-it/ https://andreasgal.com/2015/03/30/data-is-at-the-heart-of-se... Edited to add: Cliqz is a very privacy-conscious company, and I think that respect for the user was a major factor in Mozilla partnering with Cliqz. This is just to say that, AIUI, the partnership was evaluated, again, in keeping with Mozilla's principles. Also, here's the Mozilla manifesto, which documents those guiding principles: https://www.mozilla.org/about/manifesto/ https://www.mozilla.org/about/manifesto/

superkuh 9y ago

Don't forget their switch to a walled garden for extensions in order to protect users from themselves.

sf_rob 9y ago
Power users can use unsigned add-ons in Dev Edition. Regular users would be exploited by any middle ground solution in the main release. It's unfortunate the web is a dangerous place for the average user.
- superkuh 9y ago
  Asking people to use beta as a main driver is part of the reason why people think, >They seem to by trying hard to squander their reputation. The other part of it is Mozilla building the browser for the lowest common denominator at the price of user control.
soapdog 9y ago
That is FUD and also a lie. You can still distribute your extensions on whatever site you want, you just need to sign them on AMO. The workflow is: 1 - Build webextension 2 - Upload to AMO 3 - Choose "distribute on AMO" or "sign and distribute on your site"
- superkuh 9y ago
  If I need to get Mozilla's approval before I can run code in the browser running on my machine then I see a wall. That they've automated it so much as to mitigate the protection a walled garden normally gives almost makes it worse.
  - chungy 9y ago
    You can install Firefox Beta or Nightly and have unrestricted extension installation options (or use a Linux distro's packages: most of such firefox packages do not require signed extensions). It's a measure to prevent casual trojans, there are many ways around it for non-casuals and developers to employ.

arjie 9y ago

How is Mozilla been ever anything but a political force? Like 12 years ago, when Firefox came out, it was accompanied by probably the largest marketing campaign for an open project barring Wikipedia. They followed that up with some ten years of "web standards! web standards! open web standards!". This is the game Mozilla plays. That's why they won on the web: everyone does it their way now, even if their browser isn't dominant.