3 ms·

> If Comcast announced they were doing this, HN would be up in arms about how they were modifying traffic. I'm aware of the browser vs service provider differen

> If Comcast announced they were doing this, HN would be up in arms about how they were modifying traffic. I'm aware of the browser vs service provider difference, but the end result is the same. I wouldn't as easily dismiss the difference between the browser vs a service provider, but regardless, I assume Mozilla will make it an option you can turn on or off at will. I doubt Comcast would do the same. If Mozilla comes out with something that changes content without user's choice, I'm willing to bet HN will justifiably be up in arms.

FussyZeus 9y ago
> If Mozilla comes out with something that changes content without user's choice, I'm willing to bet HN will justifiably be up in arms. They did, and HN was up in arms. Did everyone forget the blowback from their cross-promotion deal with USA for Mr. Robot? https://beta.techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/mozillas-mr-robot-promo-backfires-after-it-installs-firefox-extension-without-permission/ https://beta.techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/mozillas-mr-robot-pro... That wasn't even an integrated part of the browser, it was more a case of bad defaults with an auto-installed plugin and HN was (rightly) quite pissed off with them for it. This is different IMO, this is changing how a website is rendered, not really very different at all than an adblocker which are already generally accepted.