4 ms·

I can't in the same way I can't be sure the Mozilla Corporation isn't pulling another Cliqz on me. So what's your point?

by jqt 8y ago

close04 8y ago
The point you made is (simplified) "Chrome is better than Firefox for privacy". Yet you brought nothing to support this beyond "the devil you know is better". Especially since Google is heavily relying on marketing your data to the point where they gather it covertly or force users into privacy breaking situations. Common sense would lead anyone to assume they don't collect it just to flip bits on a storage device. Just when you thought you knew the devil. Knowing this guess you'll drop Chrome now, right? [0]-[over 9000] So tell me about this devil you know and how exactly knowing all that still pushes you to believe it's the better option? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18042802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18042802 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942252 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942252 [3] https://mashable.com/article/google-chrome-69-forced-login/?europe=true#x3cJQ0apvaqo https://mashable.com/article/google-chrome-69-forced-login/?... [4] https://gizmodo.com/google-stores-location-data-even-with-location-history-1828300883 https://gizmodo.com/google-stores-location-data-even-with-lo... [5] https://mashable.com/article/google-android-data-collection-study/?europe=true#4FdC_NSYUOqh https://mashable.com/article/google-android-data-collection-... [6] i can go on but I'm pretty sure a modicum of good will from your side would be enough to get the point.
- jqt 8y ago
  I know very well the shortcomings of Chrome (4 and 5 are not Chrome) and I still choose Chrome. I know what Chrome has done in the past, and I also know what Firefox has done in the past, and I still choose Chrome. You show how Chrome 1) hides www and how 2) logging in, which I don't do, logs you into the browser. On the other hand look at what Firefox has done: -> Sent user data, including all visited URLs, to a third party advertising company, without asking the user: https://www.zdnet.com/article/firefox-tests-cliqz-engine-which-slurps-user-browsing-data/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/firefox-tests-cliqz-engine-whi... "Users who receive a version of Firefox with Cliqz will have their browsing activity sent to Cliqz servers, including the URLs of pages they visit," -> Installed an addon without permission in my browser to promote a TV show: https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/mozillas-mr-robot-promo-backfires-after-it-installs-firefox-extension-without-permission/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/mozillas-mr-robot-promo-ba... -> (Currently) shows ads in the new tab page by default (this is currently still going on): https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-tries-ads-in-firefox-again-now-powered-by-pocket-website-recommendations/ https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-tries-ads-in-firefox-again... -> Showed ads in the new tab page, even after you disabled the option to receive ads: https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-640-is-now-showing-a-bookingcom-ad-in-the-new-tab-page/ https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-640-is-now-showing-a-boo... -> Sent data to a third company about what users do with Firefox Focus, which is supposedly a privacy-focused browser: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/02/12/firefox-focus-privacy-scandal/ https://www.ghacks.net/2017/02/12/firefox-focus-privacy-scan... And the list goes on... So yes, fuck Mozilla, they can burn.
  - close04 8y ago
    > 4 and 5 are not Chrome Ok... I'd read it for you but that's not how it works. So here it is in nuggets: > "Both Android and Chrome send data to Google even in the absence of any user interaction," the study finds. "Our experiments show that a dormant, stationary Android phone (with Chrome active in the background) communicated location information to Google 340 times during a 24-hour period, or at an average of 14 data communications per hour." > So yes, fuck Mozilla, they can burn. Ah, ok, I was waiting for you to change the narrative from "Mozilla bad, Google good" to "I have no argument, I just don't like Mozilla". And don't get me wrong, you have every right to like whatever you want. Just don't pretend you have valid objective arguments.
    - jqt 8y ago
      Sure, if you disregard the entirety of my post it looks like Mozilla is full of saints. The truth is that they've backstabbed me several times and I won't allow them to do it anymore. Take from that what you will. Maybe, if the Mozilla Corporation changes hands, I will trust them again, but as it stands now, no way.
      - close04 8y ago
        Wait, I thought you are are using Chrome because unlike Firefox they (Google) never backstabbed you. Except they actually did so your argument turns into "Mozilla sometimes employs the same tactics as Google but I'll pretend Google doesn't do it to justify my personal taste". I have 0 interest in telling you what you should like or use, or pretending that Mozilla always plays fair. I just felt compelled to point out that the justification you presented here is horse manure. You use Chrome because you want to. Don't try to sell it as an objective conclusion even if it's written in the same sentence as a related objective argument. One is not based on the other. Objectively both Mozilla and Google resort to trickery, only the scale is vastly different for the company that lives on monetizing your privacy. And mind you, I use Chrome 90% of the time. But I'm not fooling myself with explanations like "Google will protect my privacy" and "the devil I know must be good". Here's a short list of other horse manure conclusions that can be extraneously drawn from accurate and objective arguments: -I drive a VW car because GM was once caught cheating on emission tests -I use an Intel CPUs because AMD CPUs once had a bug -I use Windows because Linux had a vulnerability once -I use Chrome because Mozilla once gave/sold my private data to some 3rd party

I can't in the same way I can't be sure the Mozilla Corporation isn't pulling another Cliqz on me. So what's your point?

by jqt 8y ago

I can't in the same way I can't be sure the Mozilla Corporation isn't pulling another Cliqz on me. So what's your point?

close04 8y ago

The point you made is (simplified) "Chrome is better than Firefox for privacy". Yet you brought nothing to support this beyond "the devil you know is better". Especially since Google is heavily relying on marketing your data to the point where they gather it covertly or force users into privacy breaking situations. Common sense would lead anyone to assume they don't collect it just to flip bits on a storage device. Just when you thought you knew the devil. Knowing this guess you'll drop Chrome now, right? [0]-[over 9000] So tell me about this devil you know and how exactly knowing all that still pushes you to believe it's the better option? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18042802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18042802 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942252 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942252 [3] https://mashable.com/article/google-chrome-69-forced-login/?europe=true#x3cJQ0apvaqo https://mashable.com/article/google-chrome-69-forced-login/?... [4] https://gizmodo.com/google-stores-location-data-even-with-location-history-1828300883 https://gizmodo.com/google-stores-location-data-even-with-lo... [5] https://mashable.com/article/google-android-data-collection-study/?europe=true#4FdC_NSYUOqh https://mashable.com/article/google-android-data-collection-... [6] i can go on but I'm pretty sure a modicum of good will from your side would be enough to get the point.

jqt 8y ago
I know very well the shortcomings of Chrome (4 and 5 are not Chrome) and I still choose Chrome. I know what Chrome has done in the past, and I also know what Firefox has done in the past, and I still choose Chrome. You show how Chrome 1) hides www and how 2) logging in, which I don't do, logs you into the browser. On the other hand look at what Firefox has done: -> Sent user data, including all visited URLs, to a third party advertising company, without asking the user: https://www.zdnet.com/article/firefox-tests-cliqz-engine-which-slurps-user-browsing-data/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/firefox-tests-cliqz-engine-whi... "Users who receive a version of Firefox with Cliqz will have their browsing activity sent to Cliqz servers, including the URLs of pages they visit," -> Installed an addon without permission in my browser to promote a TV show: https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/mozillas-mr-robot-promo-backfires-after-it-installs-firefox-extension-without-permission/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/mozillas-mr-robot-promo-ba... -> (Currently) shows ads in the new tab page by default (this is currently still going on): https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-tries-ads-in-firefox-again-now-powered-by-pocket-website-recommendations/ https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-tries-ads-in-firefox-again... -> Showed ads in the new tab page, even after you disabled the option to receive ads: https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-640-is-now-showing-a-bookingcom-ad-in-the-new-tab-page/ https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-640-is-now-showing-a-boo... -> Sent data to a third company about what users do with Firefox Focus, which is supposedly a privacy-focused browser: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/02/12/firefox-focus-privacy-scandal/ https://www.ghacks.net/2017/02/12/firefox-focus-privacy-scan... And the list goes on... So yes, fuck Mozilla, they can burn.
- close04 8y ago
  > 4 and 5 are not Chrome Ok... I'd read it for you but that's not how it works. So here it is in nuggets: > "Both Android and Chrome send data to Google even in the absence of any user interaction," the study finds. "Our experiments show that a dormant, stationary Android phone (with Chrome active in the background) communicated location information to Google 340 times during a 24-hour period, or at an average of 14 data communications per hour." > So yes, fuck Mozilla, they can burn. Ah, ok, I was waiting for you to change the narrative from "Mozilla bad, Google good" to "I have no argument, I just don't like Mozilla". And don't get me wrong, you have every right to like whatever you want. Just don't pretend you have valid objective arguments.
  - jqt 8y ago
    Sure, if you disregard the entirety of my post it looks like Mozilla is full of saints. The truth is that they've backstabbed me several times and I won't allow them to do it anymore. Take from that what you will. Maybe, if the Mozilla Corporation changes hands, I will trust them again, but as it stands now, no way.
    - close04 8y ago
      Wait, I thought you are are using Chrome because unlike Firefox they (Google) never backstabbed you. Except they actually did so your argument turns into "Mozilla sometimes employs the same tactics as Google but I'll pretend Google doesn't do it to justify my personal taste". I have 0 interest in telling you what you should like or use, or pretending that Mozilla always plays fair. I just felt compelled to point out that the justification you presented here is horse manure. You use Chrome because you want to. Don't try to sell it as an objective conclusion even if it's written in the same sentence as a related objective argument. One is not based on the other. Objectively both Mozilla and Google resort to trickery, only the scale is vastly different for the company that lives on monetizing your privacy. And mind you, I use Chrome 90% of the time. But I'm not fooling myself with explanations like "Google will protect my privacy" and "the devil I know must be good". Here's a short list of other horse manure conclusions that can be extraneously drawn from accurate and objective arguments: -I drive a VW car because GM was once caught cheating on emission tests -I use an Intel CPUs because AMD CPUs once had a bug -I use Windows because Linux had a vulnerability once -I use Chrome because Mozilla once gave/sold my private data to some 3rd party