5 ms·

I have considered the owners and maintainers of Firefox to be malicious to the project for quite some time now. This finally cements that theory beyond any reas

I have considered the owners and maintainers of Firefox to be malicious to the project for quite some time now. This finally cements that theory beyond any reasonable doubt. What should we do about it?

blibble 5y ago
I would happily pay a monthly fee for Firefox... as long as the money went to Firefox development and not something like their mobile OS or their social missions (like 3D VR chat and other assorted crap)
jakelazaroff 5y ago
What is malicious about this? The advertisers have no access to personal information.
- barnabee 5y ago
  Advertising is malicious.
  - ygjb 5y ago
    No it's not. Advertising is natural, from pretty flowers, to peacock and spider dances, to animals marking territory and making whatever mating noises they care to. The advertising industry, which generally means the corporate owned, mass surveillance apparatus that is every authoritarians wet dream is malicious.
highwind 5y ago
What's the malice here? Maybe I missed it.
- theHIDninja 5y ago
  Advertising is fundamentally malicious.
  - NikolaeVarius 5y ago
    Using stuff for free is also fundamentally malicious.
    - theHIDninja 5y ago
      It is not Mozilla's job to profit off its users. Its job is to provide a browser. They have utterly failed at this job. I have a fundamental right to see not see the content I do not want to see. I have a fundamental right to not be advertised to. Firefox has violated this right.
      - stinkytaco 5y ago
        > It is not Mozilla's job to profit off its users. Its job is to provide a browser. Firefox is a non-profit, but it needs revenue to provide that browser to users. Right now most of that revenue comes from Google (and its search suggestions, also enabled by default, I think). I'm not sure how you expect it to do its job for free, and it seems to get nothing but pushback whenever it tries to become more independent. I do not agree with all of Firefox's decisions, but to say they have "utterly failed" feels overstated.
        theHIDninja 5y ago
        There is not a single UI change that they have made in the last five years that I have liked. The new look for tabs that they pushed a few months ago is an utter disaster. Every decision they have made in recent memory has been in the pursuit of getting rid of user customization. Something which Firefox was originally built on. This is the reason they are hemorrhaging users.
    - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
      brb looking to replace using Linux and Wikipedia
  - rascul 5y ago
    I believe that advertising could be used maliciously but I don't believe advertising is inherently malicious.
- sigzero 5y ago
  There isn't any.
megous 5y ago
Just one more thing to disable in the settings, when you don't want it. Just like search engine suggestions.. What's more to do?
- theHIDninja 5y ago
  I shouldn't have to disable a single damn thing. The entire browser should operate without any telemetry whatsoever. There should not be a single HTTP request sent outside of the ones I explicitly authorize by either explicitly clicking a link in a webpage or entering a URL into the URL bar. Anything else is harmful and a slippery slope.
stinkytaco 5y ago
> What should we do about it? Fork it. But I'm not sure I agree this is malicious. Perhaps annoying and even poorly thought out, but malicious implies they are actively trying to undermine the project, rather than trying to find ways to break the project's dependence on Google but missing the mark.
- na85 5y ago
  Fork it, and form a publicly-funded non-profit to continue development for the public good.
  - tapoxi 5y ago
    Unfortunately Mozilla is already a publicly funded nonprofit.
    - na85 5y ago
      Well they're fucking it up, royally, and it seems hard to do worse. I wish they'd stop wasting money on dumb projects like a VPN and instead just focus on making a fast, modern browser that respects my privacy and doesn't fucking show me ads.
      - kaba0 5y ago
        Okay, will you pay for that? I think VPN would be/hopefully will be a great escape rope for Firefox, as it fits well with their privacy orientedness, and does pay somewhat for the development costs.
    - fzzzy 5y ago
      Mozilla Corporation is not a nonprofit.
      - tapoxi 5y ago
        Mozilla Foundation created and owns Mozilla Corporation.
hoppyhoppy2 5y ago
If you have ideas for alternative sources of funding for Mozilla to pay its programmers and other staff without relying so heavily on Google money for their organization's existence, I'm sure they'd like to hear about it. They're trying to tackle the revenue issue on multiple fronts, including Mozilla VPN, a subscription "privacy pack" (that includes Mozilla VPN and upgraded versions of Firefox Relay and Firefox Monitor) and this.
- vondur 5y ago
  I don’t mind them receiving funding from Google. It just seems like a poorly thought out way to raise funds. They receive 400-450 million /year from Google. Is this not enough to fund Firefox development adequately?
  - hoppyhoppy2 5y ago
    They're worried about what would happen if that funding were to disappear at some point (Google could choose not to renew the contract at any time and then Mozilla would have a huge problem). Part of leadership in a big organization is looking ahead and trying to mitigate potentially-catastrophic risks before they become actual problems. Mozilla doesn't want the future of their entire organization to rest in the hands of Google, whose decisions they don't have control over (and who is also their main competitor).
  - stinkytaco 5y ago
    But Google is funding them with... advertising money. Collected from your searches and search suggestions. I'm really unsure why reliance on Google is better than other options?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
blindmute 5y ago
Nothing we can do but fork or switch. I'll stay on Firefox, bearing it, until they do something like this that I can't turn off. As soon as it ceases to be an option, I'm gone. It shouldn't be opt out but it's still the best browser for privacy, for now.

blibble 5y ago

I would happily pay a monthly fee for Firefox... as long as the money went to Firefox development and not something like their mobile OS or their social missions (like 3D VR chat and other assorted crap)

jakelazaroff 5y ago

What is malicious about this? The advertisers have no access to personal information.

barnabee 5y ago
Advertising is malicious.
- ygjb 5y ago
  No it's not. Advertising is natural, from pretty flowers, to peacock and spider dances, to animals marking territory and making whatever mating noises they care to. The advertising industry, which generally means the corporate owned, mass surveillance apparatus that is every authoritarians wet dream is malicious.

highwind 5y ago

What's the malice here? Maybe I missed it.

theHIDninja 5y ago
Advertising is fundamentally malicious.
- NikolaeVarius 5y ago
  Using stuff for free is also fundamentally malicious.
  - theHIDninja 5y ago
    It is not Mozilla's job to profit off its users. Its job is to provide a browser. They have utterly failed at this job. I have a fundamental right to see not see the content I do not want to see. I have a fundamental right to not be advertised to. Firefox has violated this right.
    - stinkytaco 5y ago
      > It is not Mozilla's job to profit off its users. Its job is to provide a browser. Firefox is a non-profit, but it needs revenue to provide that browser to users. Right now most of that revenue comes from Google (and its search suggestions, also enabled by default, I think). I'm not sure how you expect it to do its job for free, and it seems to get nothing but pushback whenever it tries to become more independent. I do not agree with all of Firefox's decisions, but to say they have "utterly failed" feels overstated.
      - theHIDninja 5y ago
        There is not a single UI change that they have made in the last five years that I have liked. The new look for tabs that they pushed a few months ago is an utter disaster. Every decision they have made in recent memory has been in the pursuit of getting rid of user customization. Something which Firefox was originally built on. This is the reason they are hemorrhaging users.
  - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
    brb looking to replace using Linux and Wikipedia
- rascul 5y ago
  I believe that advertising could be used maliciously but I don't believe advertising is inherently malicious.
sigzero 5y ago
There isn't any.

megous 5y ago

Just one more thing to disable in the settings, when you don't want it. Just like search engine suggestions.. What's more to do?

theHIDninja 5y ago
I shouldn't have to disable a single damn thing. The entire browser should operate without any telemetry whatsoever. There should not be a single HTTP request sent outside of the ones I explicitly authorize by either explicitly clicking a link in a webpage or entering a URL into the URL bar. Anything else is harmful and a slippery slope.

stinkytaco 5y ago

> What should we do about it? Fork it. But I'm not sure I agree this is malicious. Perhaps annoying and even poorly thought out, but malicious implies they are actively trying to undermine the project, rather than trying to find ways to break the project's dependence on Google but missing the mark.

na85 5y ago
Fork it, and form a publicly-funded non-profit to continue development for the public good.
- tapoxi 5y ago
  Unfortunately Mozilla is already a publicly funded nonprofit.
  - na85 5y ago
    Well they're fucking it up, royally, and it seems hard to do worse. I wish they'd stop wasting money on dumb projects like a VPN and instead just focus on making a fast, modern browser that respects my privacy and doesn't fucking show me ads.
    - kaba0 5y ago
      Okay, will you pay for that? I think VPN would be/hopefully will be a great escape rope for Firefox, as it fits well with their privacy orientedness, and does pay somewhat for the development costs.
  - fzzzy 5y ago
    Mozilla Corporation is not a nonprofit.
    - tapoxi 5y ago
      Mozilla Foundation created and owns Mozilla Corporation.

hoppyhoppy2 5y ago

If you have ideas for alternative sources of funding for Mozilla to pay its programmers and other staff without relying so heavily on Google money for their organization's existence, I'm sure they'd like to hear about it. They're trying to tackle the revenue issue on multiple fronts, including Mozilla VPN, a subscription "privacy pack" (that includes Mozilla VPN and upgraded versions of Firefox Relay and Firefox Monitor) and this.

vondur 5y ago
I don’t mind them receiving funding from Google. It just seems like a poorly thought out way to raise funds. They receive 400-450 million /year from Google. Is this not enough to fund Firefox development adequately?
- hoppyhoppy2 5y ago
  They're worried about what would happen if that funding were to disappear at some point (Google could choose not to renew the contract at any time and then Mozilla would have a huge problem). Part of leadership in a big organization is looking ahead and trying to mitigate potentially-catastrophic risks before they become actual problems. Mozilla doesn't want the future of their entire organization to rest in the hands of Google, whose decisions they don't have control over (and who is also their main competitor).
- stinkytaco 5y ago
  But Google is funding them with... advertising money. Collected from your searches and search suggestions. I'm really unsure why reliance on Google is better than other options?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

blindmute 5y ago

Nothing we can do but fork or switch. I'll stay on Firefox, bearing it, until they do something like this that I can't turn off. As soon as it ceases to be an option, I'm gone. It shouldn't be opt out but it's still the best browser for privacy, for now.