5 ms·

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

by highwind 5y ago

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.
  - tremon 5y ago
    Maybe not inherently, but in practice, it is. Pretty much all ads are forms of emotional manipulation (FOMO, artificial status boosters, nurturing insecurities about life, body image, or career) or self-serving statistics and figures. The only ads that aren't malicious are independent consumer test reports, and they're only independent if the original manufacturer didn't pay for them. And if we accept that advertising is malicious by default, all attempts to improve the reach or effectiveness of ads can only be a net negative to society. And that's not even touching on the entire surveillance infrastructure that has been constructed in the name of advertising, which we can similarly classify as malicious.
sigzero 5y ago
There isn't any.

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.
- tremon 5y ago
  Maybe not inherently, but in practice, it is. Pretty much all ads are forms of emotional manipulation (FOMO, artificial status boosters, nurturing insecurities about life, body image, or career) or self-serving statistics and figures. The only ads that aren't malicious are independent consumer test reports, and they're only independent if the original manufacturer didn't pay for them. And if we accept that advertising is malicious by default, all attempts to improve the reach or effectiveness of ads can only be a net negative to society. And that's not even touching on the entire surveillance infrastructure that has been constructed in the name of advertising, which we can similarly classify as malicious.

sigzero 5y ago

There isn't any.