3 ms·
If Mozilla was serious about repairing trust, they would make user studies opt-in instead of opt-out. As it stands now, they are performing experiments on user
by suby 9y ago
If Mozilla was serious about repairing trust, they would make user studies opt-in instead of opt-out. As it stands now, they are performing experiments on users by default.
When people say the Mr. Robot thing was a violation of privacy, I believe this is ultimately where they are coming from.
- seanp2k2 9y agoI do agree. FWIW, most software companies do A/B test on their users these days. Most people probably don’t notice, and that’s a bit the point; you don’t want test cells to be distracting, you want them to be valid measures. Pocket and Looking Glass should have been regular add-ons available for people who want them (I’m an avid Pocket user and have had a paid sub with them in the past). Even with the Yahoo search deal, it would have been nice to have the first start go through a wizard that lets you choose Yahoo (as a default option), Google, Bing, or whatever else...though I guess they likely wouldn’t have been able to score as much funding from that arrangement (but that’s just an assumption). I’m very happy that Mozilla exists and have some friends who have worked there, but I can’t say that 100% of their decisions value users and privacy above all else.
- Vinnl 9y agoIf your first line is also about the Mr. Robot thing: it was opt-in. Yes, the code was there, and it was listed as an extension (which reasonably caused people to think they caught a virus or something), but no code was actually being executed. You had to explicitly enable that yourself in about:config. (And because that is often not mentioned, it's portrayed as a privacy issue, which is a shame because it's inaccurate and damages trust more than it should.)