5 ms·

I'm gonna wager by far the majority of people who will actually get affected or outraged by this have the technical wherewithal to click a little gear icon and

I'm gonna wager by far the majority of people who will actually get affected or outraged by this have the technical wherewithal to click a little gear icon and re-enable an extension. Everyone else is running maybe uBlock and a privacy extension that their kid installed for them, and those will be whitelisted. This is a tempest in a teapot, just like every other "controversy" that Firefox finds themselves embroiled in.

lapcat 3y ago
> I'm gonna wager by far the majority of people who will actually get affected We have no idea who will be affected, because Mozilla hasn't specified their plans for this "feature". > Everyone else is running maybe uBlock and a privacy extension that their kid installed for them, and those will be whitelisted. I'm an extension developer myself. I'm not ok with a world where a tiny number of lucky extensions get whitelisted, while my extension and everyone else's extensions get silently, remotely disabled by Firefox.
- BaseballPhysics 3y ago
  They literally wrote a blog post about how they're going to use this feature. In what way have they not "specified their plans"? > I'm an extension developer myself. I'm not ok with a world where a tiny number of lucky extensions get whitelisted, while my extension and everyone else's extensions get silently, remotely disabled by Firefox Ah, now I see the real concern. Honestly, I'm not that sympathetic. Extensions have always been a potential security liability and anything that protects less savvy users when accessing online banking or other sensitive services is a good thing. Heavy extension use is the hallmark of a power user. Power users can configure Firefox to enable these extensions (Mozilla has specifically said they plan to deliver more user controls in 116), so I personally don't see the problem.
  - lapcat 3y ago
    > They literally wrote a blog post about how they're going to use this feature. In what way have they not "specified their plans"? Which domains will be quarantined? And which extensions will be exempted? Everyone seems to be assuming "banking" with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Mozilla hasn't said. There are countless banks in the world. Is Mozilla going to maintain a list of every banking web site? The fact is that nobody knows what the hell Mozilla is going to do with the quarantine list.
    - BaseballPhysics 3y ago
      So you assume the worst because you apparently don't trust them. I assume the best because I believe they have an exceptional track record. I see what they say and assume the best intentions. You look at what they don't say and assume the worst. I guess at this point we'll just see how it shakes out.
      - Khaine 3y ago
        After all the shit Mozilla has pulled why would you trust them?
        BaseballPhysics 3y ago
        Such as?
        latexr 3y ago
        The Pocket integration and Mr Robot stunt come to mind as examples that infuriated Firefox users. https://venturebeat.com/mobile/mozilla-responds-to-firefox-user-backlash-over-pocket-integration/ https://venturebeat.com/mobile/mozilla-responds-to-firefox-u... https://www.theregister.com/2017/12/18/mozilla_mr_robot_firefox_promotion/ https://www.theregister.com/2017/12/18/mozilla_mr_robot_fire...
        BaseballPhysics 3y ago
        Cool, so two examples, both more than five years old, one of which--the now eight-year-old Pocket integration--has in the long run been a complete non-event. (I'll grant you that Mr. Robot thing six years ago was pretty damn stupid, though) You'll forgive me if I don't find myself moved to outrage.
        latexr 3y ago
        I’m not trying to “move you to outrage”. I’m not the person you asked nor a Firefox user, I have no stake on what you think about Mozilla. But you did ask what Mozilla has pulled that would get someone to distrust them. Perhaps you trust Mozilla to the end of the world, but for some people all it takes is one particularly bad incident to completely lose faith. You have your own threshold, other people have theirs.
SilasX 3y ago
Just like you probably dismissed the significance of banning unsigned addons until Mozilla forgot to update the certs and we had that worldwide extension outage?
- BaseballPhysics 3y ago
  So because they screwed up in that circumstance I must now assume this new feature is a malicious power grab? Sure. I guess that makes sense. In the future I should use this entire situation when illustrating Hanlon's Razor...
  - SilasX 3y ago
    No, you should recognize your miscalibration on the question of "what's the worst that can happen".

lapcat 3y ago

> I'm gonna wager by far the majority of people who will actually get affected We have no idea who will be affected, because Mozilla hasn't specified their plans for this "feature". > Everyone else is running maybe uBlock and a privacy extension that their kid installed for them, and those will be whitelisted. I'm an extension developer myself. I'm not ok with a world where a tiny number of lucky extensions get whitelisted, while my extension and everyone else's extensions get silently, remotely disabled by Firefox.

BaseballPhysics 3y ago
They literally wrote a blog post about how they're going to use this feature. In what way have they not "specified their plans"? > I'm an extension developer myself. I'm not ok with a world where a tiny number of lucky extensions get whitelisted, while my extension and everyone else's extensions get silently, remotely disabled by Firefox Ah, now I see the real concern. Honestly, I'm not that sympathetic. Extensions have always been a potential security liability and anything that protects less savvy users when accessing online banking or other sensitive services is a good thing. Heavy extension use is the hallmark of a power user. Power users can configure Firefox to enable these extensions (Mozilla has specifically said they plan to deliver more user controls in 116), so I personally don't see the problem.
- lapcat 3y ago
  > They literally wrote a blog post about how they're going to use this feature. In what way have they not "specified their plans"? Which domains will be quarantined? And which extensions will be exempted? Everyone seems to be assuming "banking" with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Mozilla hasn't said. There are countless banks in the world. Is Mozilla going to maintain a list of every banking web site? The fact is that nobody knows what the hell Mozilla is going to do with the quarantine list.
  - BaseballPhysics 3y ago
    So you assume the worst because you apparently don't trust them. I assume the best because I believe they have an exceptional track record. I see what they say and assume the best intentions. You look at what they don't say and assume the worst. I guess at this point we'll just see how it shakes out.
    - Khaine 3y ago
      After all the shit Mozilla has pulled why would you trust them?
      - BaseballPhysics 3y ago
        Such as?
        latexr 3y ago
        The Pocket integration and Mr Robot stunt come to mind as examples that infuriated Firefox users. https://venturebeat.com/mobile/mozilla-responds-to-firefox-user-backlash-over-pocket-integration/ https://venturebeat.com/mobile/mozilla-responds-to-firefox-u... https://www.theregister.com/2017/12/18/mozilla_mr_robot_firefox_promotion/ https://www.theregister.com/2017/12/18/mozilla_mr_robot_fire...
        BaseballPhysics 3y ago
        Cool, so two examples, both more than five years old, one of which--the now eight-year-old Pocket integration--has in the long run been a complete non-event. (I'll grant you that Mr. Robot thing six years ago was pretty damn stupid, though) You'll forgive me if I don't find myself moved to outrage.
        latexr 3y ago
        I’m not trying to “move you to outrage”. I’m not the person you asked nor a Firefox user, I have no stake on what you think about Mozilla. But you did ask what Mozilla has pulled that would get someone to distrust them. Perhaps you trust Mozilla to the end of the world, but for some people all it takes is one particularly bad incident to completely lose faith. You have your own threshold, other people have theirs.

SilasX 3y ago

Just like you probably dismissed the significance of banning unsigned addons until Mozilla forgot to update the certs and we had that worldwide extension outage?

BaseballPhysics 3y ago
So because they screwed up in that circumstance I must now assume this new feature is a malicious power grab? Sure. I guess that makes sense. In the future I should use this entire situation when illustrating Hanlon's Razor...
- SilasX 3y ago
  No, you should recognize your miscalibration on the question of "what's the worst that can happen".