3 ms·

The service integration code is entirely open source and isn't executed even once unless you choose to use it. Just for comparison, Chrome has chunks of closed

The service integration code is entirely open source and isn't executed even once unless you choose to use it. Just for comparison, Chrome has chunks of closed source code, including the binary blob that is downloaded on first run to enable listening for "OK Google". This add-on is pre-installed. And it's pre-installed to make Google more money.

psykovsky 11y ago
How do you define executing the addon? Clicking the Icon in the addons bar? Just having it there?
cddotdotslash 11y ago
It's not an add-on; it's a default, difficult-to-remove-entirely integration into the browser. Surely that must have taken more engineering work than to simply ship it as a default add-on, which is why people are questioning the motives behind it. How about instead of installing extra, third-party services into the browser that people may or may not want, Mozilla improves the add-on search experience to direct users to add-ons they may like? Or the first boot experience? And I think comparing Firefox to Chrome is just legitimizing the argument; Firefox markets itself essentially as the opposite of most of the things Google does. "It's okay because Chrome does it" doesn't make me feel very good about Firefox.
- JohnTHaller 11y ago
  It's a feature that folks had been asking for in Firefox and was originally planned a while back. The resources to do the actual service side were better used elsewhere, though. I only referenced Chrome because the post I responded to specifically mentioned Chrome for comparison.
DavideNL 11y ago
> The service integration code is entirely open source and isn't executed even once unless you choose to use it. Not very reassuring. Do you suggest i make a daily reminder to check the Firefox source code to check whether the implemented privacy invading code still "isn't executed" ?

3 ms·

The service integration code is entirely open source and isn't executed even once unless you choose to use it. Just for comparison, Chrome has chunks of closed

by JohnTHaller 11y ago

psykovsky 11y ago
How do you define executing the addon? Clicking the Icon in the addons bar? Just having it there?
cddotdotslash 11y ago
It's not an add-on; it's a default, difficult-to-remove-entirely integration into the browser. Surely that must have taken more engineering work than to simply ship it as a default add-on, which is why people are questioning the motives behind it. How about instead of installing extra, third-party services into the browser that people may or may not want, Mozilla improves the add-on search experience to direct users to add-ons they may like? Or the first boot experience? And I think comparing Firefox to Chrome is just legitimizing the argument; Firefox markets itself essentially as the opposite of most of the things Google does. "It's okay because Chrome does it" doesn't make me feel very good about Firefox.
- JohnTHaller 11y ago
  It's a feature that folks had been asking for in Firefox and was originally planned a while back. The resources to do the actual service side were better used elsewhere, though. I only referenced Chrome because the post I responded to specifically mentioned Chrome for comparison.
DavideNL 11y ago
> The service integration code is entirely open source and isn't executed even once unless you choose to use it. Not very reassuring. Do you suggest i make a daily reminder to check the Firefox source code to check whether the implemented privacy invading code still "isn't executed" ?