4 ms·

"We are disadvantaged by the fact that current and future Firefox users, many of whom are privacy and security focused, cannot easily install and keep Firefox a

"We are disadvantaged by the fact that current and future Firefox users, many of whom are privacy and security focused, cannot easily install and keep Firefox as their preferred browser because of confusing operating system messages and settings." uhhh really?

jupp0r 4y ago
Maybe privacy focussed users have just moved somewhere else or given up and installed Chrome after disasters like Firefox Focus, Firefox Suggest, Leanplum or the TV series Mr. Robot extension that was silently installed.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Privacy focused users who want to use the worst privacy OS in the history of the world have a hard time installing our privacy focused browser so they can use the default privacy suck search engine that is Google! I don’t know if anyone actually says that with a straight face.
  - jupp0r 4y ago
    > Firefox Focus, Firefox Suggest, Leanplum or the TV series Mr. Robot extension
woojoo666 4y ago
Yeah there was a lot of controversy around how Windows 11 made it difficult to change the default browser [1]: https://geeks.afela.org/news/microsoft/microsoft-reverses-windows-11s-annoying-default-browser-setting-changes/ https://geeks.afela.org/news/microsoft/microsoft-reverses-wi...
phendrenad2 4y ago
Maybe people who are privacy and security focused shouldn't use operating systems that track you. This is like trying to save a sinking ship by keeping your shoes dry.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  Privacy is not a binary state, but rather something of a spectrum ( and partially a reason as to why Google and others try different avenues for siphoning data ). Every little bit helps a little bit depending on your tolerance and skill level. I genuinely do not expect my mom to run FF with appropriate plugins from a scrubbed VM each time she wants to check something. But I can give her some sane defaults instead. I agree with your general point, but ignoring an issue just because there is no 100% solution is not reasonable either.
  - phendrenad2 4y ago
    > ignoring an issue just because there is no 100% solution But that isn't what I'm proposing. I'm saying that when you buy a vehicle, and the driver's-side door, by design, unchangeably, cannot be locked, maybe you shouldn't buy that model of car, rather than try to hack privacy into the vehicle by adding an aftermarket passenger-side door with laser tripwires and barbed wire.

jupp0r 4y ago

Maybe privacy focussed users have just moved somewhere else or given up and installed Chrome after disasters like Firefox Focus, Firefox Suggest, Leanplum or the TV series Mr. Robot extension that was silently installed.

bombcar 4y ago
Privacy focused users who want to use the worst privacy OS in the history of the world have a hard time installing our privacy focused browser so they can use the default privacy suck search engine that is Google! I don’t know if anyone actually says that with a straight face.
- jupp0r 4y ago
  > Firefox Focus, Firefox Suggest, Leanplum or the TV series Mr. Robot extension

woojoo666 4y ago

Yeah there was a lot of controversy around how Windows 11 made it difficult to change the default browser [1]: https://geeks.afela.org/news/microsoft/microsoft-reverses-windows-11s-annoying-default-browser-setting-changes/ https://geeks.afela.org/news/microsoft/microsoft-reverses-wi...

phendrenad2 4y ago

Maybe people who are privacy and security focused shouldn't use operating systems that track you. This is like trying to save a sinking ship by keeping your shoes dry.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
Privacy is not a binary state, but rather something of a spectrum ( and partially a reason as to why Google and others try different avenues for siphoning data ). Every little bit helps a little bit depending on your tolerance and skill level. I genuinely do not expect my mom to run FF with appropriate plugins from a scrubbed VM each time she wants to check something. But I can give her some sane defaults instead. I agree with your general point, but ignoring an issue just because there is no 100% solution is not reasonable either.
- phendrenad2 4y ago
  > ignoring an issue just because there is no 100% solution But that isn't what I'm proposing. I'm saying that when you buy a vehicle, and the driver's-side door, by design, unchangeably, cannot be locked, maybe you shouldn't buy that model of car, rather than try to hack privacy into the vehicle by adding an aftermarket passenger-side door with laser tripwires and barbed wire.