5 ms·

Do you have any reason to believe it is anything beyond a developer wanting to record usage and runtime issues?

by harikb 4y ago

dataflow 4y ago
I don't think moving the goalposts for Mozilla makes for a compelling argument.
jakear 4y ago
No matter what it’s for, there should be a way for concerned users to disable it. I say this as someone who is pro telemetry in general.
- bkberry352 4y ago
  There is a way and it's officially documented: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/telemetry-clientid https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/telemetry-clientid just go into about:preferences
  - user3939382 4y ago
    Again here’s their traffic upon start and exit after doing that https://i.imgur.com/VFb1maZ.png https://i.imgur.com/VFb1maZ.png This is no extensions and all telemetry disabled.
pessimizer 4y ago
I have a reason to believe that it is a company wanting something beyond what many or most of the users would prefer.
- jonathankoren 4y ago
  > I have a reason to believe that it is a company wanting something beyond what many or most of the users would prefer. As an exmozillian I find this I have to wonder about your reasons for this. From why you think crash reporting, render time, and privacy preserving analytics aren't giving benefits that users prefer, all the way to characterizing MoCo as "a company".
  - kreeben 4y ago
    >> crash reporting, render time, and privacy preserving analytics Those aren't the only times FF wants to "phone home". Personally, what made me jump from FF to a fork of the same, is Firefox Suggest. To me, this is a disgusting feature. Firefox with this feature says to me, we, Mozilla, want to become more like Chrome/Google. It makes me not want to share even the tiniest bit of information with Mozilla.
    - nl 4y ago
      I find Firefox Suggest pretty good. But if you want to turn it off you can here: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-suggest https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-suggest
      - kreeben 4y ago
        That doesn't even come close to addressing the point I was trying to make. All of these anti privacy features, default enabled as they are, tells me something about Mozilla. Something you might not even want to think about. If you're fine with sending to Mozilla everything you type into the address bar, then you probably don't care that much at all about privacy, which would be a shame, because privacy, online and offline, is nothing more and nothing less than a god damn human right. >> but you can turn it off, doh 99% won't, because they don't know what's the point. Perhaps they're right.
        nl 4y ago
        This same thread has people complaining how Firefox is funded by Google (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32258663 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32258663). But when they try to develop alternative funding mechanisms like this they also get attacked. > All of these anti privacy features, default enabled as they are, tells me something about Mozilla. Something you might not even want to think about. Their goal isn't anti-privacy, it's that they need alternate revenue sources. I'm fine with that. >>> but you can turn it off, doh Please don't misquote me. My parent post was polite and informative and to mischaracterise it ("doh") is unnecessary.
tmp_anon_22 4y ago
Assuming eternal altruism from a third party is absurd. This data is being soaked up, processed, transformed, stored, and at some level shared via a peering agreement.
Jensson 4y ago
Firefox is funded by Google and not by users, I bet they use statistics on web searches via the browser to negotiate those deals. Just like everything else, if you don't pay for it then you are the product. It would be different if Firefox was funded by donations, but it is a for profit company that gets basically all its money from selling users to Google.
- jonathankoren 4y ago
  I hate to break it to you, but Google also has that data, because that's the way client-server architectures work. I really find it hard believe that SELECT country, COUNT(*) FROM search_log GROUP BY country is an invasion of privacy, or that somehow getting a commission off of the data you're already providing to a third party, is somehow making a user more of a product, than they already are.
  - Jensson 4y ago
    Google don't know how those users interact with firefox search settings though, and without that they don't know how much it is worth to pay for being the default search. Also, since they are funded by ads it means that they can't make ad blocking as a default feature, since then those users wouldn't be worth anything to sell. Whether you like it or not Firefox isn't free from any of this control.
    - jefftk 4y ago
      > Google don't know how those users interact with firefox search settings though, and without that they don't know how much it is worth to pay for being the default search. Why not pay roughly in proportion to the revenue you get from Firefox users searching?
    - jonathankoren 4y ago
      > Google don't know how those users interact with firefox search settings though, and without that they don't know how much it is worth to pay for being the default search. Where are you getting your information, because I don't believe this true from my conversations with Firefox developers and data scientists. I think Firefox sends a ping to Google along with a telemetry ping to Mozilla, and then both Mozilla and Google correlate / fight over data as part of the contractual negotiations.
GuB-42 4y ago
I have no real reason to believe Firefox telemetry is used nefariously. But I also don't believe that personal data Google collect will be used nefariously. I have yet to find a story that proves Google untrustworthy of my data. I consider personalized ads an annoyance (and I block them), but not a significant threat to my privacy, after all, they are shown to no one but me. Same thing for Windows 10 telemetry. As you can see, I am rather trusting of big tech, but because I am trusting, I am not going to choose Firefox for privacy reasons. I actually use half Firefox, half Chrome, but privacy has nothing to do with it. Now, if I was less trusting, enough not to want to share my data with Google and Microsoft, then why would I trust Firefox? I wouldn't want any data to leave my computer unless I explicitly allowed it. Firefox has questionable management and has Google as its biggest partner, enough for the paranoid me to raise concerns. And one thing for sure, with telemetry, if I really had "something to hide" (ex: criminal activity), I wouldn't use Firefox as is.
- kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
  Google isn't the core problem. It's all the other bottom feeders using the same technologies as Google to engage in mass surveillance. Google's inertia enables the bad actors to persist. Even with Google, the data they have on you isn't safe against an overly broad warrant.
- gentleman11 4y ago
  What about when arrests begin to happen as google reports peoples browsing data (or more) to authorities as women look for ways to get abortions? Or are you of the opinion that “criminals should know better than to use tools like chrome”? Pardon the strong phrasing, it’s just a sentiment I see on here a lot, it’s not directed at you personally
  - GuB-42 4y ago
    - AFAIK it didn't happen yet - Who tells you that Mozilla won't do it? - Criminal should know better than to use Chrome and Firefox, at least not without additional protection, and it includes disabling telemetry in both products. I am not saying that Google can't do anything bad to me, I just trust that they won't. Answering the other comment about Nest camera, I didn't see any example of Google actually handing out data to police without a warrant, they are just saying that they can. I already know that they can, what I want to know is what they did. I also have no real reason to fear Mozilla, and I left telemetry enabled. But I think that if you really want people to take your commitment to privacy seriously, "I collect data but trust me, I won't do anything bad" is not enough, I want that of course, but I also want technical commitment, and telemetry that is not strictly opt-in is a big no. For me, vanilla Firefox is not a privacy-focused browser (and neither are Chrome and Edge). For me the criteria is: would I use it to commit a serious crime? If the answer is "no", it is not private. It is not that I want to commit a crime, or that privacy=crime, but that's like a litmus test. In fact I didn't even look into it but TOR browser comes to mind, it is based on Firefox, but of course, telemetry has been removed.

Do you have any reason to believe it is anything beyond a developer wanting to record usage and runtime issues?

by harikb 4y ago

Do you have any reason to believe it is anything beyond a developer wanting to record usage and runtime issues?

dataflow 4y ago

I don't think moving the goalposts for Mozilla makes for a compelling argument.

jakear 4y ago

No matter what it’s for, there should be a way for concerned users to disable it. I say this as someone who is pro telemetry in general.

bkberry352 4y ago
There is a way and it's officially documented: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/telemetry-clientid https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/telemetry-clientid just go into about:preferences
- user3939382 4y ago
  Again here’s their traffic upon start and exit after doing that https://i.imgur.com/VFb1maZ.png https://i.imgur.com/VFb1maZ.png This is no extensions and all telemetry disabled.

pessimizer 4y ago

I have a reason to believe that it is a company wanting something beyond what many or most of the users would prefer.

jonathankoren 4y ago
> I have a reason to believe that it is a company wanting something beyond what many or most of the users would prefer. As an exmozillian I find this I have to wonder about your reasons for this. From why you think crash reporting, render time, and privacy preserving analytics aren't giving benefits that users prefer, all the way to characterizing MoCo as "a company".
- kreeben 4y ago
  >> crash reporting, render time, and privacy preserving analytics Those aren't the only times FF wants to "phone home". Personally, what made me jump from FF to a fork of the same, is Firefox Suggest. To me, this is a disgusting feature. Firefox with this feature says to me, we, Mozilla, want to become more like Chrome/Google. It makes me not want to share even the tiniest bit of information with Mozilla.
  - nl 4y ago
    I find Firefox Suggest pretty good. But if you want to turn it off you can here: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-suggest https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-suggest
    - kreeben 4y ago
      That doesn't even come close to addressing the point I was trying to make. All of these anti privacy features, default enabled as they are, tells me something about Mozilla. Something you might not even want to think about. If you're fine with sending to Mozilla everything you type into the address bar, then you probably don't care that much at all about privacy, which would be a shame, because privacy, online and offline, is nothing more and nothing less than a god damn human right. >> but you can turn it off, doh 99% won't, because they don't know what's the point. Perhaps they're right.
      - nl 4y ago
        This same thread has people complaining how Firefox is funded by Google (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32258663 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32258663). But when they try to develop alternative funding mechanisms like this they also get attacked. > All of these anti privacy features, default enabled as they are, tells me something about Mozilla. Something you might not even want to think about. Their goal isn't anti-privacy, it's that they need alternate revenue sources. I'm fine with that. >>> but you can turn it off, doh Please don't misquote me. My parent post was polite and informative and to mischaracterise it ("doh") is unnecessary.

tmp_anon_22 4y ago

Assuming eternal altruism from a third party is absurd. This data is being soaked up, processed, transformed, stored, and at some level shared via a peering agreement.

Jensson 4y ago

Firefox is funded by Google and not by users, I bet they use statistics on web searches via the browser to negotiate those deals. Just like everything else, if you don't pay for it then you are the product. It would be different if Firefox was funded by donations, but it is a for profit company that gets basically all its money from selling users to Google.

jonathankoren 4y ago
I hate to break it to you, but Google also has that data, because that's the way client-server architectures work. I really find it hard believe that SELECT country, COUNT(*) FROM search_log GROUP BY country is an invasion of privacy, or that somehow getting a commission off of the data you're already providing to a third party, is somehow making a user more of a product, than they already are.
- Jensson 4y ago
  Google don't know how those users interact with firefox search settings though, and without that they don't know how much it is worth to pay for being the default search. Also, since they are funded by ads it means that they can't make ad blocking as a default feature, since then those users wouldn't be worth anything to sell. Whether you like it or not Firefox isn't free from any of this control.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    > Google don't know how those users interact with firefox search settings though, and without that they don't know how much it is worth to pay for being the default search. Why not pay roughly in proportion to the revenue you get from Firefox users searching?
  - jonathankoren 4y ago
    > Google don't know how those users interact with firefox search settings though, and without that they don't know how much it is worth to pay for being the default search. Where are you getting your information, because I don't believe this true from my conversations with Firefox developers and data scientists. I think Firefox sends a ping to Google along with a telemetry ping to Mozilla, and then both Mozilla and Google correlate / fight over data as part of the contractual negotiations.

GuB-42 4y ago

I have no real reason to believe Firefox telemetry is used nefariously. But I also don't believe that personal data Google collect will be used nefariously. I have yet to find a story that proves Google untrustworthy of my data. I consider personalized ads an annoyance (and I block them), but not a significant threat to my privacy, after all, they are shown to no one but me. Same thing for Windows 10 telemetry. As you can see, I am rather trusting of big tech, but because I am trusting, I am not going to choose Firefox for privacy reasons. I actually use half Firefox, half Chrome, but privacy has nothing to do with it. Now, if I was less trusting, enough not to want to share my data with Google and Microsoft, then why would I trust Firefox? I wouldn't want any data to leave my computer unless I explicitly allowed it. Firefox has questionable management and has Google as its biggest partner, enough for the paranoid me to raise concerns. And one thing for sure, with telemetry, if I really had "something to hide" (ex: criminal activity), I wouldn't use Firefox as is.

kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
Google isn't the core problem. It's all the other bottom feeders using the same technologies as Google to engage in mass surveillance. Google's inertia enables the bad actors to persist. Even with Google, the data they have on you isn't safe against an overly broad warrant.
gentleman11 4y ago
What about when arrests begin to happen as google reports peoples browsing data (or more) to authorities as women look for ways to get abortions? Or are you of the opinion that “criminals should know better than to use tools like chrome”? Pardon the strong phrasing, it’s just a sentiment I see on here a lot, it’s not directed at you personally
- GuB-42 4y ago
  - AFAIK it didn't happen yet - Who tells you that Mozilla won't do it? - Criminal should know better than to use Chrome and Firefox, at least not without additional protection, and it includes disabling telemetry in both products. I am not saying that Google can't do anything bad to me, I just trust that they won't. Answering the other comment about Nest camera, I didn't see any example of Google actually handing out data to police without a warrant, they are just saying that they can. I already know that they can, what I want to know is what they did. I also have no real reason to fear Mozilla, and I left telemetry enabled. But I think that if you really want people to take your commitment to privacy seriously, "I collect data but trust me, I won't do anything bad" is not enough, I want that of course, but I also want technical commitment, and telemetry that is not strictly opt-in is a big no. For me, vanilla Firefox is not a privacy-focused browser (and neither are Chrome and Edge). For me the criteria is: would I use it to commit a serious crime? If the answer is "no", it is not private. It is not that I want to commit a crime, or that privacy=crime, but that's like a litmus test. In fact I didn't even look into it but TOR browser comes to mind, it is based on Firefox, but of course, telemetry has been removed.