6 ms·

Side note unrelated to TLS. Using telemetry Mozilla was able to precisely measure how many connections are actually established with TLS 1.0 and 1.1. Without n

Side note unrelated to TLS. Using telemetry Mozilla was able to precisely measure how many connections are actually established with TLS 1.0 and 1.1. Without numbers, they'd have been flying blind, making decisions with no rational basis. That's why I personally choose to leave telemetry on in applications that I trust. It helps the dev makes sensible, data-driven decisions.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
flukus 8y ago
The information from people that explicitly opt-in would have given them the same insight. > That's why I personally choose to leave telemetry on in applications that I trust The problem is that when I have to "leave it on" rather than explicitly enable it then it's no longer an application I trust.
- esrauch 8y ago
  The opt-in information would be skewed to the point of uselessness though right, thanks to extreme correlation? In fact, the non-opt out is probably pretty skewed itself so some wrong data driven decisions are inevitable.
  - smichel17 8y ago
    There's a third, seldom-discussed alternative to opt-in and opt-out: no default. On first launch or after a set period, show a non-dismissable dialog asking users to choose between the two, with no default option selected, so you can't just click through. This strikes me as the best compromise between respect for user privacy and acknowledging that data collection can be useful, with the trade-off that some users will choose not to use the software/website rather than decide on an option (thus, 'no default' must be used sparingly).
    - cpeterso 8y ago
      That's still opt-in because the user elects to submit their telemetry data, even though they didn't seek out the setting.
      - dnbgfher 8y ago
        It is opt-in, but typically both opt-in and out-out in these sorts of contexts refer to what happens in the absence of user input. In that context opt-in has a bit of an issue with people even knowing it exists, not to mention caring enough to go find the option to opt-in, and then doing so. This route will, for better or worse, produce a very self-selected group. The proposal above is a way to maintain the benefits of opt-in (namely, consent) while trying to improve the quality of the group.
mcny 8y ago
> Using telemetry Mozilla was able to precisely measure how many connections are actually established with TLS 1.0 and 1.1. Without numbers, they'd have been flying blind, making decisions with no rational basis. That's why I personally choose to leave telemetry on in applications that I trust. It helps the dev makes sensible, data-driven decisions. Some unrelated advice: what would you do if business brings up Google analytics data showing Google Chrome, IE, and Safari are three main browsers people use and the usage share of Mozilla Firefox is under 5% for a particular website? I tried to show my own use case with uBlock Origin which means when I go to the website it doesn't show up on Google Analytics. How do we make decisions based on self-reported data? You'd think institutions funded by public monies would be more sensitive on issues like this but my pleas fall on deaf ears.
- Operyl 8y ago
  In this specific usecase, if you're having trouble convincing, maybe doing analysis based on access logs (depending on your size, I guess, maybe you'd need to sample only a couple of days depending on how much access logs you store). EDIT: I'm mostly suggesting this because it sounds like all you need is proof that your Google Analytics data might be incorrect.
  - r3bl 8y ago
    I find it ridiculous that an adblocker blocks access to even first party analytics. /piwik.php is found on EasyPrivacy list, which is one of the default uBlock Origin filter lists. I really didn't expect my adblocker to do that when I installed it.
    - joosters 8y ago
      I find it ridiculous that first party analytics requires extra requests at all - there's enough log information from my actual page requests, you don't need to make extra ones. If your logging is so inefficient, it should be blocked.
      - 8y ago
a_imho 8y ago
As a Firefox user, Moz://a has plenty on their tab and does not deserve special treatment.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

flukus 8y ago

The information from people that explicitly opt-in would have given them the same insight. > That's why I personally choose to leave telemetry on in applications that I trust The problem is that when I have to "leave it on" rather than explicitly enable it then it's no longer an application I trust.

esrauch 8y ago
The opt-in information would be skewed to the point of uselessness though right, thanks to extreme correlation? In fact, the non-opt out is probably pretty skewed itself so some wrong data driven decisions are inevitable.
- smichel17 8y ago
  There's a third, seldom-discussed alternative to opt-in and opt-out: no default. On first launch or after a set period, show a non-dismissable dialog asking users to choose between the two, with no default option selected, so you can't just click through. This strikes me as the best compromise between respect for user privacy and acknowledging that data collection can be useful, with the trade-off that some users will choose not to use the software/website rather than decide on an option (thus, 'no default' must be used sparingly).
  - cpeterso 8y ago
    That's still opt-in because the user elects to submit their telemetry data, even though they didn't seek out the setting.
    - dnbgfher 8y ago
      It is opt-in, but typically both opt-in and out-out in these sorts of contexts refer to what happens in the absence of user input. In that context opt-in has a bit of an issue with people even knowing it exists, not to mention caring enough to go find the option to opt-in, and then doing so. This route will, for better or worse, produce a very self-selected group. The proposal above is a way to maintain the benefits of opt-in (namely, consent) while trying to improve the quality of the group.

mcny 8y ago

> Using telemetry Mozilla was able to precisely measure how many connections are actually established with TLS 1.0 and 1.1. Without numbers, they'd have been flying blind, making decisions with no rational basis. That's why I personally choose to leave telemetry on in applications that I trust. It helps the dev makes sensible, data-driven decisions. Some unrelated advice: what would you do if business brings up Google analytics data showing Google Chrome, IE, and Safari are three main browsers people use and the usage share of Mozilla Firefox is under 5% for a particular website? I tried to show my own use case with uBlock Origin which means when I go to the website it doesn't show up on Google Analytics. How do we make decisions based on self-reported data? You'd think institutions funded by public monies would be more sensitive on issues like this but my pleas fall on deaf ears.

Operyl 8y ago
In this specific usecase, if you're having trouble convincing, maybe doing analysis based on access logs (depending on your size, I guess, maybe you'd need to sample only a couple of days depending on how much access logs you store). EDIT: I'm mostly suggesting this because it sounds like all you need is proof that your Google Analytics data might be incorrect.
- r3bl 8y ago
  I find it ridiculous that an adblocker blocks access to even first party analytics. /piwik.php is found on EasyPrivacy list, which is one of the default uBlock Origin filter lists. I really didn't expect my adblocker to do that when I installed it.
  - joosters 8y ago
    I find it ridiculous that first party analytics requires extra requests at all - there's enough log information from my actual page requests, you don't need to make extra ones. If your logging is so inefficient, it should be blocked.
    - 8y ago

a_imho 8y ago

As a Firefox user, Moz://a has plenty on their tab and does not deserve special treatment.