7 ms·

So is this just a VPN that's baked into the browser? One of the problems with VPNs is that you're putting a lot of faith in your VPN provider. I trust Mozilla,

So is this just a VPN that's baked into the browser? One of the problems with VPNs is that you're putting a lot of faith in your VPN provider. I trust Mozilla, and would gladly pay them for that service (I would use Freedome, but afaik they don't support Linux). However, it would have to be usable outside of my browser. Tangentually, I wish Mozilla also offered paid email (or email with a premium plan), which is another service that requires a lot of trust. It would help provide alternative sources of income to keep Firefox alive, and Thunderbird could be a stunningly good email client if they had more resources to pour into it. Mozilla's product is trust and control. Although they are non-profit, I see no issue with them offering paid services.

dochtman 7y ago
Totally agree on email. I've long been saying that they should just acquire/partner with FastMail, seems like a great fit and would allow Mozilla to better align their revenue stream with their users. Also, this constant killing and reviving of the Test Pilot brand looks incredibly short-sighted and stupid to me.
- sp332 7y ago
  I think it's down to who wants to work on the Test Pilot program. If someone has some ideas to test and the time to work on it, then it's active.
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  I love both Firefox and FastMail, but I'd never want one to acquire the other. Vertical integration introduces lock-in. Even if it's not intentional, it's far too easy for developers to introduce "conveniences" that only work if you're fully adopting their ecosystem.
portmanteaufu 7y ago
> So is this just a VPN that's baked into the browser? No, it's a secure connection to an HTTP/HTTPS proxy being run by Cloudflare. It isn't a general-purpose VPN. I would love it if Mozilla offered an email service.
- dralley 7y ago
  > Mozilla email service Yes, please
- smacktoward 7y ago
  As much as I like the idea of baking better privacy tools into the browser, it's hard for me to get enthusiastic about the idea of making Cloudflare even more of an official man-in-the-middle for all network traffic than they already are.
  - martin_a 7y ago
    Single Point of Failure and Attack Vector, what could possibly go wrong?
  - zelphirkalt 7y ago
    I am still not sure how much one can trust Cloudflare as an entitiy. At some point people started putting loads of stuff behind Cloudflare, enabling them to be the perfect MITM, which is concerning. Probably only a question of time until some profit seeking people come around and see opportunity in it and then we are screwed even more, than we are already with Google captchas. Then we will not be able to use many more websites any longer, because someone in their incredible wisdom decided to put everything behind Cloudflare. Scary.
    - judge2020 7y ago
      You could say the same thing about any CDN - Cloudfront, Fastly, Akamai, etc. Is it right to say that the only reason Cloudflare is the forefront of this concern is because of their business model of offering the CDN for free, while the others have a much more limited free tier or service or none at all?
      - zelphirkalt 7y ago
        I am almost equally worried about other very popular CDNs. However, being the most used CDN makes some people short-circuit and not think about the dangers any longer Just like with captchas from Google. Many people simply put them onto their websites without ever thinking about that, "because everyone does it". If so many people put stuff behind Cloudflare, then at some point the same kind of people, who put captchas without thinking, will put stuff behind Cloudflare without thinking. Scripts and other stuff from first party usually seem to me at least more trustworthy than something from a third party. It also saves me the mental step of thinking: "Hmmm, why are there scripts loaded from a third party? Is this some kind of ads stuff?" If a website does not work without unblocking third party scripts, there is some chance, that I will simply abandon it. When a website's purpose is to inform me about something and I do not see the need for any interactivity, I might also abandon it, if it does not show content without unblocking scripts in general, including first party. Web frameworks, which do not take care of at least presenting something when scripts are not unblocked, thus make a website less trustworthy for me.
abdullahkhalids 7y ago
> Tangentually, I wish Mozilla also offered paid email hot (or email with a premium plan), which is another service that requires a lot of trust. It would help provide alternative sources of income to keep Firefox alive. 1. If Mozilla email is used to support Firefox in part, then it will be overpriced. I am not sure if many would like to pay more than a token amount for charity. 2. Generally, software companies have increased tendency and incentive to horizontally expand because of the low barriers of entry. These incentives and tendencies are exactly what led to Microsoft and Google become these monopolies that exploit other players in the market to their advantage. I would rather Mozilla remain small, neither vertically integrated (like that attempt at FirfoxOS), or horizontally integrate (like offering email on top of a browser). I say this as someone who uses Thunderbird as their primary email client. The bazaar model of software development protects user freedoms more than the Cathedral model.
- partialrecall 7y ago
  > 1. If Mozilla email is used to support Firefox in part, then it will be overpriced. That's true only if a typical commercial email provider has no profit margin, which I don't believe to be the case.
- criley2 7y ago
  Firefox is successfully funded by Google through selling default search options. Unless Firefox's revenue were to suddenly and dramatically drop I don't see why they'd need to increase new product prices to fund an already funded project. And Google, of course, with a 50 state anti-trust probe opening against them, would probably fund Firefox for free just to desperately promote the idea of competition. I'm reminded about how Microsoft funded Apple during the MS monopoly era as a "see, we have competition" response to investigators. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/29/steve-jobs-and-bill-gates-what-happened-when-microsoft-saved-apple.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/29/steve-jobs-and-bill-gates-wh... https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech-0806/ https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech-0806/
input_sh 7y ago
> Although they are non-profit, I see no issue with them offering paid services. I believe that's the goal. They're introducing a lot of services in the relatively short time span: Firefox Notes, Lockwise (password manager), Send (file-sharing service), Screenshots (image sharing service), and now a VPN. After all these projects mature a bit, they're probably gonna slap a subscription on top and offer Firefox for free, Firefox + services for a price. I'm personally totally fine with that way of diversifying their income. I already donate to Mozilla somewhat regularly, so the only thing that might prevent me from taking that offer is a steep price. EDIT: Technically speaking, Pocket is kind of a bookmarking service with a built-in premium option already, but they're really, really not giving it love. "login with Google" button still has the lowercase "g" icon. That's like a two-minute fix that hasn't happened since 2015.
- clairity 7y ago
  i hope they get the pricing right, which by my estimation is probably 2-tier pricing (on top of the free browser). an inexpensive base tier, maybe $3/month, and a premium tier at ~$10/month. diversity of donors/customers has long-term benefits (better market insights, for example), so that lower tier is important to attract the less affluent. the higher tier is for techies like us who can better afford to support a more free and open internet.
thomasfromcdnjs 7y ago
Maybe Firefox should work on their spell checker.

dochtman 7y ago

Totally agree on email. I've long been saying that they should just acquire/partner with FastMail, seems like a great fit and would allow Mozilla to better align their revenue stream with their users. Also, this constant killing and reviving of the Test Pilot brand looks incredibly short-sighted and stupid to me.

sp332 7y ago
I think it's down to who wants to work on the Test Pilot program. If someone has some ideas to test and the time to work on it, then it's active.
ocdtrekkie 7y ago
I love both Firefox and FastMail, but I'd never want one to acquire the other. Vertical integration introduces lock-in. Even if it's not intentional, it's far too easy for developers to introduce "conveniences" that only work if you're fully adopting their ecosystem.

portmanteaufu 7y ago

> So is this just a VPN that's baked into the browser? No, it's a secure connection to an HTTP/HTTPS proxy being run by Cloudflare. It isn't a general-purpose VPN. I would love it if Mozilla offered an email service.

dralley 7y ago
> Mozilla email service Yes, please
smacktoward 7y ago
As much as I like the idea of baking better privacy tools into the browser, it's hard for me to get enthusiastic about the idea of making Cloudflare even more of an official man-in-the-middle for all network traffic than they already are.
- martin_a 7y ago
  Single Point of Failure and Attack Vector, what could possibly go wrong?
- zelphirkalt 7y ago
  I am still not sure how much one can trust Cloudflare as an entitiy. At some point people started putting loads of stuff behind Cloudflare, enabling them to be the perfect MITM, which is concerning. Probably only a question of time until some profit seeking people come around and see opportunity in it and then we are screwed even more, than we are already with Google captchas. Then we will not be able to use many more websites any longer, because someone in their incredible wisdom decided to put everything behind Cloudflare. Scary.
  - judge2020 7y ago
    You could say the same thing about any CDN - Cloudfront, Fastly, Akamai, etc. Is it right to say that the only reason Cloudflare is the forefront of this concern is because of their business model of offering the CDN for free, while the others have a much more limited free tier or service or none at all?
    - zelphirkalt 7y ago
      I am almost equally worried about other very popular CDNs. However, being the most used CDN makes some people short-circuit and not think about the dangers any longer Just like with captchas from Google. Many people simply put them onto their websites without ever thinking about that, "because everyone does it". If so many people put stuff behind Cloudflare, then at some point the same kind of people, who put captchas without thinking, will put stuff behind Cloudflare without thinking. Scripts and other stuff from first party usually seem to me at least more trustworthy than something from a third party. It also saves me the mental step of thinking: "Hmmm, why are there scripts loaded from a third party? Is this some kind of ads stuff?" If a website does not work without unblocking third party scripts, there is some chance, that I will simply abandon it. When a website's purpose is to inform me about something and I do not see the need for any interactivity, I might also abandon it, if it does not show content without unblocking scripts in general, including first party. Web frameworks, which do not take care of at least presenting something when scripts are not unblocked, thus make a website less trustworthy for me.

abdullahkhalids 7y ago

> Tangentually, I wish Mozilla also offered paid email hot (or email with a premium plan), which is another service that requires a lot of trust. It would help provide alternative sources of income to keep Firefox alive. 1. If Mozilla email is used to support Firefox in part, then it will be overpriced. I am not sure if many would like to pay more than a token amount for charity. 2. Generally, software companies have increased tendency and incentive to horizontally expand because of the low barriers of entry. These incentives and tendencies are exactly what led to Microsoft and Google become these monopolies that exploit other players in the market to their advantage. I would rather Mozilla remain small, neither vertically integrated (like that attempt at FirfoxOS), or horizontally integrate (like offering email on top of a browser). I say this as someone who uses Thunderbird as their primary email client. The bazaar model of software development protects user freedoms more than the Cathedral model.

partialrecall 7y ago
> 1. If Mozilla email is used to support Firefox in part, then it will be overpriced. That's true only if a typical commercial email provider has no profit margin, which I don't believe to be the case.
criley2 7y ago
Firefox is successfully funded by Google through selling default search options. Unless Firefox's revenue were to suddenly and dramatically drop I don't see why they'd need to increase new product prices to fund an already funded project. And Google, of course, with a 50 state anti-trust probe opening against them, would probably fund Firefox for free just to desperately promote the idea of competition. I'm reminded about how Microsoft funded Apple during the MS monopoly era as a "see, we have competition" response to investigators. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/29/steve-jobs-and-bill-gates-what-happened-when-microsoft-saved-apple.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/29/steve-jobs-and-bill-gates-wh... https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech-0806/ https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech-0806/

input_sh 7y ago

> Although they are non-profit, I see no issue with them offering paid services. I believe that's the goal. They're introducing a lot of services in the relatively short time span: Firefox Notes, Lockwise (password manager), Send (file-sharing service), Screenshots (image sharing service), and now a VPN. After all these projects mature a bit, they're probably gonna slap a subscription on top and offer Firefox for free, Firefox + services for a price. I'm personally totally fine with that way of diversifying their income. I already donate to Mozilla somewhat regularly, so the only thing that might prevent me from taking that offer is a steep price. EDIT: Technically speaking, Pocket is kind of a bookmarking service with a built-in premium option already, but they're really, really not giving it love. "login with Google" button still has the lowercase "g" icon. That's like a two-minute fix that hasn't happened since 2015.

clairity 7y ago
i hope they get the pricing right, which by my estimation is probably 2-tier pricing (on top of the free browser). an inexpensive base tier, maybe $3/month, and a premium tier at ~$10/month. diversity of donors/customers has long-term benefits (better market insights, for example), so that lower tier is important to attract the less affluent. the higher tier is for techies like us who can better afford to support a more free and open internet.

thomasfromcdnjs 7y ago

Maybe Firefox should work on their spell checker.