3 ms·

CEO > He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-m

CEO > He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission. LOL the day that Firefox stops me from running what I want is the day I'll get rid of it.

Silhouette 10mo ago
I still think it was a mistake for Firefox to dump its old plugin model. The customisation was a USP for Firefox and many useful tweaks and minor features have never been replaced. Today the ability to run proper content blockers is still a selling point for Firefox but obviously wouldn't be if they started to meddle with that as well. (Has there ever been a more obvious case of anticompetitive behaviour than the biggest browser nerfing ad blocking because it's owned by one of the biggest ad companies?) Other than customisation the only real advantage I see for Firefox today is the privacy angle. But again that would obviously be compromised if they started breaking tools like content blockers that help to provide that protection.
- guywhocodes 10mo ago
  It made me stop using FF on android.
  - scruple 10mo ago
    What are you using as an alternative?
  - treyd 10mo ago
    They readded support a while ago.
  - deleted 10mo ago
    [deleted]
SilasX 10mo ago
They...already do that? They stopped allowing unsigned addons, even if you allow them in about:config (a power-user feature). Even Chrome allows you to toggle the option to do that -- in a more user-friendly way! -- and actually honors it, so I don't think it's the massive security hole everyone claims. Edit: My Hitler parody of when Firefox introduced this (almost 10 years ago now!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGARf8K5J8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGARf8K5J8
- ekjhgkejhgk 10mo ago
  Funny. Though, on this line: "The whole point of Firefox is that I can customize it all I want". You realize that with more customization comes more fingerprinting? :-)
  - tomalbrc 10mo ago
    Funny. You realize that you can prevent that? :-)

Silhouette 10mo ago

I still think it was a mistake for Firefox to dump its old plugin model. The customisation was a USP for Firefox and many useful tweaks and minor features have never been replaced. Today the ability to run proper content blockers is still a selling point for Firefox but obviously wouldn't be if they started to meddle with that as well. (Has there ever been a more obvious case of anticompetitive behaviour than the biggest browser nerfing ad blocking because it's owned by one of the biggest ad companies?) Other than customisation the only real advantage I see for Firefox today is the privacy angle. But again that would obviously be compromised if they started breaking tools like content blockers that help to provide that protection.

guywhocodes 10mo ago
It made me stop using FF on android.
- scruple 10mo ago
  What are you using as an alternative?
- treyd 10mo ago
  They readded support a while ago.
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]

SilasX 10mo ago

They...already do that? They stopped allowing unsigned addons, even if you allow them in about:config (a power-user feature). Even Chrome allows you to toggle the option to do that -- in a more user-friendly way! -- and actually honors it, so I don't think it's the massive security hole everyone claims. Edit: My Hitler parody of when Firefox introduced this (almost 10 years ago now!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGARf8K5J8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGARf8K5J8

ekjhgkejhgk 10mo ago
Funny. Though, on this line: "The whole point of Firefox is that I can customize it all I want". You realize that with more customization comes more fingerprinting? :-)
- tomalbrc 10mo ago
  Funny. You realize that you can prevent that? :-)