4 ms·

If it's a paid version of Firefox this means it will respect our privacy by having no telemetry, no remote code execution via Normandy, etc, or will it be the s

by hajxg 7y ago

If it's a paid version of Firefox this means it will respect our privacy by having no telemetry, no remote code execution via Normandy, etc, or will it be the same thing in that regard?

pjmlp 7y ago
Better than Chrome will ever be.
- hajxg 7y ago
  That's open to discussion. Even if Chrome sends your data to Google (and it probably sends more data than Firefox), at least you know the data is being received by Google and not by unrelated third parties, like when Mozilla sent full URL history of some users to an advertisement company: https://blog.mozilla.org/press-uk/2017/10/06/testing-cliqz-in-firefox/ https://blog.mozilla.org/press-uk/2017/10/06/testing-cliqz-i...
  - ForHackernews 7y ago
    > One of Mozilla’s core privacy principles is No Surprises: we will use and share data in ways that are transparent and benefit our users. That is why we are telling you about this today. We want users to understand why we’ve taken this approach and what it means for them. While still a small experiment, the data collection and new search experience are major changes in the way this build of Firefox performs. We hope that users will appreciate the improved experience, but if users want to turn it off, they can always disable data collection or remove the Cliqz add-on entirely. Those monsters!
    - hajxg 7y ago
      Yes, if you go to the Google privacy policy they surely sound the same. But the truth is that they were funnelling your data to a third party. It doesn't matter if they say it's for the benefit of their users or how transparent they are. They were sending your private data to a third party and it was on by default for some users.
      - hedora 7y ago
        https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en > When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps)
  - HugoDaniel 7y ago
    The logic here is that Google will never send/sell your data to third parties ? How do you think Facebook et al gets a hold of your google data ? How do you think companies like Cambridge Analytica thrive ? I am genuinely curious to know what your view of the world on these topics is and why are you so insistently (and apparently naively) defending google in this regard.
    - hajxg 7y ago
      I said Firefox is bad at protecting my privacy. Someone compared Mozilla to Google, so I said that even Google is better. In other words I'm not defending Google, I'm saying Mozilla is even worse. I despise Google, too. What's your proof that Google gives your data to Facebook? That doesn't sound right. On the other hand, I showed proof that Mozilla gives your personal data (list of URLs you visit, no less!) to a third party.
      - headsoup 7y ago
        Are you hoping people don't read the article you linked or do you not understand the approach Mozilla used? The data is not used to identify the user by building a profile and the source IP is removed on collection. Now of course there's a level of trust required in them doing what they say, but this is nowhere near Google et al's levels of data hoarding and reselling anyway.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- lucideer 7y ago
  That's a low bar. Pretty sure we can aim higher than that.
miohtama 7y ago
Would privacy oriented use pay for anything in the first place? Based on my experience they are quite a tough audience to sell any products. No enterprise sales, and the small privacy oriented userbase usually has less disposable income. As far as I understood Firefox is already very pro privacy and, unlike some competition, telemetry and others must be explicit opt-ins from the users. Where the paid offering would shine is the bundled services: password manager, notification center, etc. All those features already there, but having a sustainable business model around them. Though not sure how free offering vs. paid offering can be discriminated so that the latter is attractive.
a_imho 7y ago
Sounds like a good option to have around, but gives off a protection racket vibe to remove all the crapware included.

by hajxg 7y ago

If it's a paid version of Firefox this means it will respect our privacy by having no telemetry, no remote code execution via Normandy, etc, or will it be the same thing in that regard?

pjmlp 7y ago

Better than Chrome will ever be.

hajxg 7y ago
That's open to discussion. Even if Chrome sends your data to Google (and it probably sends more data than Firefox), at least you know the data is being received by Google and not by unrelated third parties, like when Mozilla sent full URL history of some users to an advertisement company: https://blog.mozilla.org/press-uk/2017/10/06/testing-cliqz-in-firefox/ https://blog.mozilla.org/press-uk/2017/10/06/testing-cliqz-i...
- ForHackernews 7y ago
  > One of Mozilla’s core privacy principles is No Surprises: we will use and share data in ways that are transparent and benefit our users. That is why we are telling you about this today. We want users to understand why we’ve taken this approach and what it means for them. While still a small experiment, the data collection and new search experience are major changes in the way this build of Firefox performs. We hope that users will appreciate the improved experience, but if users want to turn it off, they can always disable data collection or remove the Cliqz add-on entirely. Those monsters!
  - hajxg 7y ago
    Yes, if you go to the Google privacy policy they surely sound the same. But the truth is that they were funnelling your data to a third party. It doesn't matter if they say it's for the benefit of their users or how transparent they are. They were sending your private data to a third party and it was on by default for some users.
    - hedora 7y ago
      https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en > When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps)
- HugoDaniel 7y ago
  The logic here is that Google will never send/sell your data to third parties ? How do you think Facebook et al gets a hold of your google data ? How do you think companies like Cambridge Analytica thrive ? I am genuinely curious to know what your view of the world on these topics is and why are you so insistently (and apparently naively) defending google in this regard.
  - hajxg 7y ago
    I said Firefox is bad at protecting my privacy. Someone compared Mozilla to Google, so I said that even Google is better. In other words I'm not defending Google, I'm saying Mozilla is even worse. I despise Google, too. What's your proof that Google gives your data to Facebook? That doesn't sound right. On the other hand, I showed proof that Mozilla gives your personal data (list of URLs you visit, no less!) to a third party.
    - headsoup 7y ago
      Are you hoping people don't read the article you linked or do you not understand the approach Mozilla used? The data is not used to identify the user by building a profile and the source IP is removed on collection. Now of course there's a level of trust required in them doing what they say, but this is nowhere near Google et al's levels of data hoarding and reselling anyway.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
lucideer 7y ago
That's a low bar. Pretty sure we can aim higher than that.

miohtama 7y ago

Would privacy oriented use pay for anything in the first place? Based on my experience they are quite a tough audience to sell any products. No enterprise sales, and the small privacy oriented userbase usually has less disposable income. As far as I understood Firefox is already very pro privacy and, unlike some competition, telemetry and others must be explicit opt-ins from the users. Where the paid offering would shine is the bundled services: password manager, notification center, etc. All those features already there, but having a sustainable business model around them. Though not sure how free offering vs. paid offering can be discriminated so that the latter is attractive.

a_imho 7y ago

Sounds like a good option to have around, but gives off a protection racket vibe to remove all the crapware included.