7 ms·

I don't understand. Their partner is Mullvad. Mullvad has servers across the entire god damn globe. Why is this US-only? Why is it US-only going into early 2020

I don't understand. Their partner is Mullvad. Mullvad has servers across the entire god damn globe. Why is this US-only? Why is it US-only going into early 2020, as in, months to provide service to non-US regions in what's probably going to be a limited roll-out to "select regions"? It's not the 90s anymore. It's time to drop the US-centric crap. They're not a publisher. They're not distributing movies or TV series.

tmikaeld 7y ago
I think it's because Firefox have made their own client and they only want to offer Wireguard connections. Since Wireguard is still a bit new and buggy, they probably want to make sure it's stable and roll out in stages.
- jplayer01 7y ago
  Wireguard isn't US-only in any way. Like, I literally do not understand at all. I can download a working, functional, largely stable Wireguard client on my phone or configure it on my Linux desktop without issue from outside the US. Like, US-based has no bearing on any of this. At all.
  - warhorse10_9 7y ago
    Where did you get an implication that Wireguard was US-only. The poster you are replying to is simply stating since Wireguard may still be a bit buggy, they are rolling this out in the US first to iron out any kinks before making it widely available.
    - admax88q 7y ago
      But how does rolling it out US only first help with the fact that Wireguard is buggy. They are already rolling it out slowly via a waiting list. Limiting that to US only doesn't really change how "widely available" it is in order to iron out the kinds. Seem more likely this is regulatory related.
      - warhorse10_9 7y ago
        That is a very good point on it possibly being regulatory related. I agree, that is probably also a big part of it.
      - michaelbuckbee 7y ago
        Trying to do support in multiple languages and timezones can be tricky (and surely adds to the cost), I don't know for sure if that's the reason but it's a reasonable one.
      - callalex 7y ago
        Let’s take the fact that they don’t have the resources to launch to every user all at one for the reasons stated in comments near this one. Do you agree with that premise? If so, what do you propose as a more ideal limited rollout strategy? First come first served? That has its own share of problems with user burnout and people feeling annoyed after being left out as well.
    - nickik 7y ago
      Wireguard itself is probebly not buggy, but the problem is the whole software and infrastructure around it can absolutly be buggy. So it makes sense.
  - arcticfox 7y ago
    I think you might be underestimating the breadth of i18n & l10n for a brand new beta, especially for an organization that is built on not making privacy or legal missteps. They only have 1 / 6 clients ready and zero customers yet, their attention has to be split all over the place, so limiting some variables in the meantime seems like a reasonable idea.
  - lmorchard 7y ago
    The VPN tech itself is not the only concern. Localization & payments & legal are also huge concerns beyond the US. This is also aimed at not necessarily tech-savvy folks, so that is also a concern.
- antihero 7y ago
  But national boundaries are so antiquated.
zymhan 7y ago
Give them some time, eh?
dewey 7y ago
It’s pretty normal to test features in one market and then roll it out and solve scaling issues or bugs that crop up. If you have a flawless strategy to scale and roll out a big bug free release across the globe I’m sure a lot of people would be interested in that. Just like Disney+ that started in the Netherlands months before starting in the US.
- jonplackett 7y ago
  My guess is everyone on here defending US only... is in the US. Could be wrong.
  - hombre_fatal 7y ago
    I'm not in the US but "It’s pretty normal to test features in one market and then roll it out" and "Just like Disney+ that started in the Netherlands months before starting in the US" make perfect sense to me. I get that everyone wants everything right now, but if you're not in the US, surely you still understand domestic-market roll out? Doesn't seem like it's worthy of anything more than a passing "damn, too bad."
  - lmorchard 7y ago
    I mean, also computers are hard and this is a thing that's worth getting right by reducing variables and taking it small steps at a time?
    - jonplackett 7y ago
      So why not start with a nice small country?
  - ksec 7y ago
    Nope. Rolling out features in your home country is pretty normal. Apple does it all the time. What I have problem is slow roll out features across the globe, when you cant see or understand the reason behind it.
    - 7y ago
cptskippy 7y ago
What are the legal implications for Mozilla with this? Hand waving that all the technology is available outside the US doesn't absolve Mozilla from Liability or Legal obligations in the US or anywhere else it's offering the service. It's in Beta, why should they go through all the legal processes to launch the product globally where there's still the potential that the final product might look completely different or never release?
dk3 7y ago
For legal and payment processing reasons most likely. May need extra time to set up for other countries.
ed209a 7y ago
For legal and payment processing reasons most likely. May need extra time to set up for other countries. Hi dang ;)
runamok 7y ago
How about offering support in all the countries and time zones a world-wide rollout would require? That's not trivial.

tmikaeld 7y ago

I think it's because Firefox have made their own client and they only want to offer Wireguard connections. Since Wireguard is still a bit new and buggy, they probably want to make sure it's stable and roll out in stages.

jplayer01 7y ago
Wireguard isn't US-only in any way. Like, I literally do not understand at all. I can download a working, functional, largely stable Wireguard client on my phone or configure it on my Linux desktop without issue from outside the US. Like, US-based has no bearing on any of this. At all.
- warhorse10_9 7y ago
  Where did you get an implication that Wireguard was US-only. The poster you are replying to is simply stating since Wireguard may still be a bit buggy, they are rolling this out in the US first to iron out any kinks before making it widely available.
  - admax88q 7y ago
    But how does rolling it out US only first help with the fact that Wireguard is buggy. They are already rolling it out slowly via a waiting list. Limiting that to US only doesn't really change how "widely available" it is in order to iron out the kinds. Seem more likely this is regulatory related.
    - warhorse10_9 7y ago
      That is a very good point on it possibly being regulatory related. I agree, that is probably also a big part of it.
    - michaelbuckbee 7y ago
      Trying to do support in multiple languages and timezones can be tricky (and surely adds to the cost), I don't know for sure if that's the reason but it's a reasonable one.
    - callalex 7y ago
      Let’s take the fact that they don’t have the resources to launch to every user all at one for the reasons stated in comments near this one. Do you agree with that premise? If so, what do you propose as a more ideal limited rollout strategy? First come first served? That has its own share of problems with user burnout and people feeling annoyed after being left out as well.
  - nickik 7y ago
    Wireguard itself is probebly not buggy, but the problem is the whole software and infrastructure around it can absolutly be buggy. So it makes sense.
- arcticfox 7y ago
  I think you might be underestimating the breadth of i18n & l10n for a brand new beta, especially for an organization that is built on not making privacy or legal missteps. They only have 1 / 6 clients ready and zero customers yet, their attention has to be split all over the place, so limiting some variables in the meantime seems like a reasonable idea.
- lmorchard 7y ago
  The VPN tech itself is not the only concern. Localization & payments & legal are also huge concerns beyond the US. This is also aimed at not necessarily tech-savvy folks, so that is also a concern.
antihero 7y ago
But national boundaries are so antiquated.

zymhan 7y ago

Give them some time, eh?

dewey 7y ago

It’s pretty normal to test features in one market and then roll it out and solve scaling issues or bugs that crop up. If you have a flawless strategy to scale and roll out a big bug free release across the globe I’m sure a lot of people would be interested in that. Just like Disney+ that started in the Netherlands months before starting in the US.

jonplackett 7y ago
My guess is everyone on here defending US only... is in the US. Could be wrong.
- hombre_fatal 7y ago
  I'm not in the US but "It’s pretty normal to test features in one market and then roll it out" and "Just like Disney+ that started in the Netherlands months before starting in the US" make perfect sense to me. I get that everyone wants everything right now, but if you're not in the US, surely you still understand domestic-market roll out? Doesn't seem like it's worthy of anything more than a passing "damn, too bad."
- lmorchard 7y ago
  I mean, also computers are hard and this is a thing that's worth getting right by reducing variables and taking it small steps at a time?
  - jonplackett 7y ago
    So why not start with a nice small country?
- ksec 7y ago
  Nope. Rolling out features in your home country is pretty normal. Apple does it all the time. What I have problem is slow roll out features across the globe, when you cant see or understand the reason behind it.
  - 7y ago

cptskippy 7y ago

What are the legal implications for Mozilla with this? Hand waving that all the technology is available outside the US doesn't absolve Mozilla from Liability or Legal obligations in the US or anywhere else it's offering the service. It's in Beta, why should they go through all the legal processes to launch the product globally where there's still the potential that the final product might look completely different or never release?

dk3 7y ago

For legal and payment processing reasons most likely. May need extra time to set up for other countries.

ed209a 7y ago

For legal and payment processing reasons most likely. May need extra time to set up for other countries. Hi dang ;)

runamok 7y ago

How about offering support in all the countries and time zones a world-wide rollout would require? That's not trivial.