5 ms·

We get the browser for free and these are just ads, not trackers - they are not stealing our data like Chrome, FB, and the rest. I have nothing against straigh

We get the browser for free and these are just ads, not trackers - they are not stealing our data like Chrome, FB, and the rest. I have nothing against straight ads.

SubiculumCode 6y ago
I agree. But I use those links for quick links to site I visit a lot. THis gets in my way
kbenson 6y ago
Unfortunately, "ads" has become a synonym for many people to tracking and privacy and invasive elements, when like most things it encompasses a whole spectrum from minimal and informative (the name of the restaurant on the outside of the building)to manipulative and annoying. People feelings about one particularly negative segment of a spectrum often overflow into other examples and taint their feeling. It's just how people are. I also have nothing against straight ads. Who knows how Mozilla will implement this though, and whether it will be more annoying than useful. I have some suspicions, but I'll reserve judgement until I've experienced them, since I sometimes have a hard time predicting correctly (as I suspect many people do) because the topic is somewhat emotionally charged.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
matheusmoreira 6y ago
> I have nothing against straight ads. Why? It's almost always noise nobody wants to see. Advertising hurts usability by definition. Putting ads in the address bar of all places is actually hostile to users: people who are used to finding bookmarks that way will end up opening sponsored links instead due to muscle memory.
- curiousgal 6y ago
  Why not? The bills have to be paid. Wouldn't you rather they monetize their product in a responsible way than join the others? We live in the real world after all.
  - matheusmoreira 6y ago
    The responsible way to monetize something is to charge for it. Advertising makes it normal to have "free" products and people become slaves to it. Can't say or do anything they don't like lest they kill your income.
    - ramraj07 6y ago
      Sure, let's all build tree houses and live in them. If only problems can just be solved by willing the solution you want!
      - matheusmoreira 6y ago
        That's exactly what everyone should do. Instead of letting them get away with it, we should block it all unconditionally and by default, forcing them to find another solution that's acceptable. Linux distributions in particular are in the perfect position to patch this out and improve user experience for all their users.
- TheRealPomax 6y ago
  But it's also Firefox, just go into about:config and turn it off if you don't like it and presto?
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago
    It's great to have an out. But are those synchronized? Because I find the increasing number of tweaks difficult to remember. Tyranny of the default is real.
    - dmckeon 6y ago
      Put any preferred tweaks in a user.js file in the profile directory, // commented with meanings and reasons, and save wetware memory.
      - paulryanrogers 6y ago
        When I was young and enthusiastic I used to maintain user and chrome CSS overrides like that. Synced via DropBox no less! Now I am older and tired of doing the symlinking every time I setup a new install of Ff.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        How often do you set up new installs? I've been moving around the same firefox install since Opera died.
        scaladev 6y ago
        Just copy your ~/.mozilla everywhere. I too have been using the same profile for about a decade, across many machines.
      - zo1 6y ago
        Oh they're trying to remove that ability as well: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1543752 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1543752 It's a slow and steady advance, not something that happens overnight.
LegitShady 6y ago
Personally my concern is more fundamental than that. If mozilla is moving towards expanding advertising in FF from the developer, then they're changing their incentive structure in a way that makes putting ads in front of my eyes against my wishes more and more beneficial to them. I can't see this as a good step forward. It only leads to places where they're incentivized to make the browser worse to make more money.
sellyme 6y ago
> I have nothing against straight ads. I do. They are actively hostile to the user experience. I will criticise any update to software that deliberately makes the user experience worse.
- symlinkk 6y ago
  Ok, well suggest a different way they can make money then. No, donations are not cutting it.
  - tux3 6y ago
    Note, I've heard that Mozilla takes donations, but I don't think Firefox does. Personally I don't mind at all if Mozilla wants to display ads in Treeherder or in their corporate offices, I wouldn't even feel like I want to pay to remove those :) My point being, I don't expect firefox donations would amount to very many millions, but it's important to note that today the option doesn't really even exist.
  - sellyme 6y ago
    > Ok, well suggest a different way they can make money then. Don't. If that means not doing further development, great. Leave that to people who want to make the software better, not worse. If you can find a way to monetise software, that's fantastic, but if that monetisation requires degrading quality I have no respect for it.
    - symlinkk 6y ago
      Guess what, “the people who want to make the software better” can start today! Just fork it, it’s all open source! Wait, why hasn’t that happened yet? Is it because those people have bills to pay? Hmm...
      - sellyme 6y ago
        > Wait, why hasn’t that happened yet? You mean apart from Pale Moon, Basilisk, Waterfox, Tor, XB, Iceweasel, Swiftfox, Swiftweasel, Cometbird, and IceDragon? Yeah no idea why that thing that has happened several times hasn't happened.

We get the browser for free and these are just ads, not trackers - they are not stealing our data like Chrome, FB, and the rest. I have nothing against straight ads.

SubiculumCode 6y ago

I agree. But I use those links for quick links to site I visit a lot. THis gets in my way

kbenson 6y ago

Unfortunately, "ads" has become a synonym for many people to tracking and privacy and invasive elements, when like most things it encompasses a whole spectrum from minimal and informative (the name of the restaurant on the outside of the building)to manipulative and annoying. People feelings about one particularly negative segment of a spectrum often overflow into other examples and taint their feeling. It's just how people are. I also have nothing against straight ads. Who knows how Mozilla will implement this though, and whether it will be more annoying than useful. I have some suspicions, but I'll reserve judgement until I've experienced them, since I sometimes have a hard time predicting correctly (as I suspect many people do) because the topic is somewhat emotionally charged.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

matheusmoreira 6y ago

> I have nothing against straight ads. Why? It's almost always noise nobody wants to see. Advertising hurts usability by definition. Putting ads in the address bar of all places is actually hostile to users: people who are used to finding bookmarks that way will end up opening sponsored links instead due to muscle memory.

curiousgal 6y ago
Why not? The bills have to be paid. Wouldn't you rather they monetize their product in a responsible way than join the others? We live in the real world after all.
- matheusmoreira 6y ago
  The responsible way to monetize something is to charge for it. Advertising makes it normal to have "free" products and people become slaves to it. Can't say or do anything they don't like lest they kill your income.
  - ramraj07 6y ago
    Sure, let's all build tree houses and live in them. If only problems can just be solved by willing the solution you want!
    - matheusmoreira 6y ago
      That's exactly what everyone should do. Instead of letting them get away with it, we should block it all unconditionally and by default, forcing them to find another solution that's acceptable. Linux distributions in particular are in the perfect position to patch this out and improve user experience for all their users.
TheRealPomax 6y ago
But it's also Firefox, just go into about:config and turn it off if you don't like it and presto?
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  It's great to have an out. But are those synchronized? Because I find the increasing number of tweaks difficult to remember. Tyranny of the default is real.
  - dmckeon 6y ago
    Put any preferred tweaks in a user.js file in the profile directory, // commented with meanings and reasons, and save wetware memory.
    - paulryanrogers 6y ago
      When I was young and enthusiastic I used to maintain user and chrome CSS overrides like that. Synced via DropBox no less! Now I am older and tired of doing the symlinking every time I setup a new install of Ff.
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        How often do you set up new installs? I've been moving around the same firefox install since Opera died.
      - scaladev 6y ago
        Just copy your ~/.mozilla everywhere. I too have been using the same profile for about a decade, across many machines.
    - zo1 6y ago
      Oh they're trying to remove that ability as well: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1543752 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1543752 It's a slow and steady advance, not something that happens overnight.

LegitShady 6y ago

Personally my concern is more fundamental than that. If mozilla is moving towards expanding advertising in FF from the developer, then they're changing their incentive structure in a way that makes putting ads in front of my eyes against my wishes more and more beneficial to them. I can't see this as a good step forward. It only leads to places where they're incentivized to make the browser worse to make more money.

sellyme 6y ago

> I have nothing against straight ads. I do. They are actively hostile to the user experience. I will criticise any update to software that deliberately makes the user experience worse.

symlinkk 6y ago
Ok, well suggest a different way they can make money then. No, donations are not cutting it.
- tux3 6y ago
  Note, I've heard that Mozilla takes donations, but I don't think Firefox does. Personally I don't mind at all if Mozilla wants to display ads in Treeherder or in their corporate offices, I wouldn't even feel like I want to pay to remove those :) My point being, I don't expect firefox donations would amount to very many millions, but it's important to note that today the option doesn't really even exist.
- sellyme 6y ago
  > Ok, well suggest a different way they can make money then. Don't. If that means not doing further development, great. Leave that to people who want to make the software better, not worse. If you can find a way to monetise software, that's fantastic, but if that monetisation requires degrading quality I have no respect for it.
  - symlinkk 6y ago
    Guess what, “the people who want to make the software better” can start today! Just fork it, it’s all open source! Wait, why hasn’t that happened yet? Is it because those people have bills to pay? Hmm...
    - sellyme 6y ago
      > Wait, why hasn’t that happened yet? You mean apart from Pale Moon, Basilisk, Waterfox, Tor, XB, Iceweasel, Swiftfox, Swiftweasel, Cometbird, and IceDragon? Yeah no idea why that thing that has happened several times hasn't happened.