• ooterness@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    You can disable this “feature”:

    1. Visit about:config

    2. Set “dom.private-attribution.submission.enabled” to false

  • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago
    • Main def of open source Ladybird browser not liking homosexuals or whatever:

    Community: Boo!

    • Mozilla acquiring an ad tech company and implementing it now:

    Community: well, whatever.

    I sense some mental dissonance.

    • offspec@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Cognitive dissonance? Not supporting bigotry is wholly unrelated to this issue. Also who calls gay people homosexuals? Just say gays like a normal person ffs

    • divergency@scribe.disroot.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lol ladybird browser Dev is a homophobe? Could you send some evidence, I want to see this joke. Also, yeah, that’s really funny that people are ready to attack anybody with wrong political opinion, but when anybody is attacking them with ads/tracking/MITM they’ll find a thousand excuses for that fucked up behavior. Evils should be treated equally – mitigated and hated. There is no excuse for a single ad/tracker a person haven’t asked for. Same as there is no excuse to hate gays

    • refalo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      if by “community” you mean the majority of users… I think you are backwards in both of those. Most don’t care about what Andreas did, and most firefox users are outraged at this.

      • kersplomp@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes. The problem with cookies was that they could be used to track and identify you. If this can’t do that, then what’s the issue?

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Anonymous data collection at scale is a myth.

          Anonymous data collection on me when assembled will say that I’m a 40-49yo unmarried college-educated male working in one area in a certain industry and living in another area.

          Only one person meets all those criteria, and it’s me.

          • OR3X@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Mozilla has to generate enough revenue to continue developing their products somehow. It would be nice if donations were enough to cover those development costs but that simply isn’t the case. Because of this the ad networks are a necessary “evil”.

            • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Supporting ad networks is not a ‘necessary’ evil. There are many not-for-profit organisations that do not use ads for revenue raising.

              • OR3X@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                What would you suggest then? They’ve been unable to sustain themselves via donations alone.

                • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  When writing my previous post I had started writing a list of suggested strategies; but I changed my mind about posting that. I’m not a member of Mozilla. I don’t know what particular challenges they face, and my expertise are not in not-for-profit fundraising. So although I do have ideas, I don’t really want to get into a trap of trying to defend my half-arse ideas against people picking them apart. It’s beside the point. The point is just that it is achievable, as evidenced by other organisations achieving it.

                  I will say though that they could at least just mention on the Firefox ‘successful update’ page that Firefox is supported by donations, and give a link. A lot of people really like Firefox; and I think that if Firefox asked for donations, they would get more donations.

            • Dave@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              The setting from the original post is for sites in general, it’s not specifically about Mozilla sites. I’m not sure how having this option relates to their revenue, unless Google put it in their search contract with them?

              Edit: Wait, I see people mentioning Mozilla acquired an ad company?

        • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The issue is that I already knew about cookies. I don’t want my browser to phone home (or anywhere else) without my consent.

        • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Most data can be de-anonymized with some clever tricks. I don’t know about Mozilla but the other’s definitely try to keep it just anonymous engough to later be correlated with the rest of your profile.

          • tuhriel@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Also, it might be annonymized for this dataset, by adding more ‘annonymized’ datasets stuff can be correlated

    • divergency@scribe.disroot.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      There is no “anonymous” data. All telemetry should ALWAYS be opt-in, not opt-out. Otherwise all the words about privacy browser are garbage lies. And they are. Mozilla always lies to its users.

  • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This almost sounds like a hoax. But assuming it’s true… Install LibreWolf. It’s Firefox without the infuriating Mozilla stupid.

  • Fugtig Fisk@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    WTF… i thought this was just click bait but went to check on my phone as i am not at my PC right now

  • devilish666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So… finally Mozilla has slowly but surely going into the dark side huh…
    I’m not surprised anymore, they even had telemetry code inside android apps from waaay back then (although seems for debugging purpose)

    In the end I’m not justify all company bc they need money for survive & exist, although i don’t like the way they do it

    • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Mozilla has been bad actors since at least 2017, they implemented a piece of malware called Cliqz on a small number of German user’s installs that recommends various services based on browser history (aka tracking and advertising); so I’d hardly call this a new development, or Mozilla “just now” falling to the dark side (and that’s not even mentioning pocket and DoH to cloudflare, which are still enabled by default).

  • slug@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    weirdly if you search “website advertising preferences” in the firefox setting search bar nothing comes up, you have to manually scroll to find it

    • MrShankles@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      For everyone trying to find the setting— On my android phone, there’s a setting called “data collection”. Mine were already all off, so idk who it affects

  • Jolteon@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I mean, it doesn’t look like it’s personally identifiable at all, just aggregate.

    • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      IMO, that’s splitting a hair.

      For a browser that supposedly respects user privacy, the fact that this is opt-out rather than opt-in really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

      I’m going to reconsider my monthly recurring donation to Mozilla, especially if they keep this up.

      • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Adjust isn’t google adservices. The difference is staggering, actually, and way more than a hair’s split on identifying information not being included.

        • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I can’t help but see it as the foot in the door.

          I understand that Mozilla needs money, but I can’t make everyone who uses Firefox commit to donating money to keep them from having to do things like this to stay afloat. But them going down this path makes me not want to donate at all.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I hate to break it to you but you aren’t a significant source of income for Mozilla. You are the product not the customer.

        • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I never said I was, just that I wanted to support the browser that respects my privacy, and this move is making me reconsider it.

          As long as it’s open source someone will be able to find a way to turn it off, either by an addon or by patching and compiling the source code.

  • Irdial@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Literally every browser has this option, and it gives users a choice. If you use an ad blocker, it has this option as well and has had it for several years now.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not this option, but generally I agree. Currently I don’t think this is bad, and in the longer term we will see if this leaks any identifyable data.

    • doodledup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is the first browset to implement something like that. I don’t know what you’re talking about and you don’t either apparently.

      • Irdial@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Safari refers to it as “Privacy-Preserving Ad Measurement”, and Chrome includes an option as part of its “Privacy Sandbox.” Please have the decency to do a basic google search before being an asshole :)

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Chrome’s privacy sandbox is a very different protocol from Mozilla’s PPA protocol. I haven’t read about Safari’s variant so I don’t know if that’s a copy/paste of Chrome’s or it’s own protocol

          The big difference between Privacy Sandbox (previously Topics API and before that FLoC) and PPA is that Google’s “solution” still tracks the user while Mozilla’s just tracks the ads and gives aggregate data to the advertiser

  • doodledup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    They haven’t added ad tracking. That’s a fake news. You should read up on how it actually works.

    • reversebananimals@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve read up on how it works and it says it’s tracking how well or badly ads perform when shown to me. That’s tracking ads, otherwise called ad tracking.

      What now?

      • Eylrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s tracking how well ads perform without tracking individual users. Tracking ads isn’t the problem. Tracking users is the problem. Before this the only way to track ad performance was by tracking users. This is a way to track ad performance without tracking users.

        • hcbxzz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Tracking ads is also a problem, just a different one. The whole point of ads is to manipulate your behavior. There’s plenty of reason to not want to make that more effective

    • kbal@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Mozilla has been ad funded since 2005

      It was funded through a deal with an ad company. It did not become an ad company itself until much more recently. jwz had a succinct and memorable response to the the absurd idea that really it’s been ad-funded all along and that this makes things okay:

      You are just another of those so-predictable people saying, “The animal shelter has always had a kitten-meat deli, why are you surprised?”

      Yes, Mozilla started making absolutely horrific funding and management decisions many years ago. Today, they have taken this subtext and turned it into the actual text.

    • fernlike3923@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Browser development might not be sustainable with user donations, but it sure as hell is sustainable when you get 400 million bucks by Google every year.

      • Auzy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re actually wrong. They did when they started.

        I know because I donated

        The funny thing is that the people who complain most about stuff like this, tend to be the people who contribute the least.

        If you don’t like them making money to support development, you’re more than welcome to work full time on developing it for free

        • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The funny thing is that the people who complain most about stuff like this, tend to be the people who contribute the least.

          Why would I donate to them if they are going to advertise at me either way?

        • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ah interesting. I didn’t know. I started using Firefox as a kid around version 2.

          I totally want Firefox to make money, but I wonder if donations couldn’t be a significant part of that pie today. It seems a lot more people would prefer to donate to Firefox than Mozilla.

          • Auzy@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Yeah. Maybe I’m just old (I’m 40).

            I would be happy to donate. But, the reality is… donations don’t work in my experience. One of my projects went FrontPage on all the major tech sites (and even was mentioned in Linux format magazine).

            I got $300 in donations.

            $250 was from a person I knew…

            Backend projects often get screwed more, and I guess you probably need to hope you get supported by companies like Redhat ultimately. This may be why in my case. But backend projects always have people dissing them (frontend projects just need to look good and markety)

            I think what’s more important is that it’s open source to be honest. We’re actually lucky we still have Mozilla honestly.

            In Mozilla browser days (after Netscape), id imagine it would have been a struggle to get a good pay. The people still there I suspect took a massive risk, and could have moved to lots of other companies like Google instead quite easily

            I think they deserve to get rewarded…

            • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I feel like Mozilla could have been what NextCloud is today. Totally free, open source, and offering a vast offering of office apps, with paid hosted versions. It could be all neatly integrated into Firefox, and you would pay a premium to use them without self hosting. The only thing they did was create Firefox VPN, and the only reason most people use VPNs is because of scammy marketing.

              • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Totally free, open source, and offering a vast offering of office apps, with paid hosted versions.

                When Mozilla was founded the idea of hosted webapps didn’t exist. Quite the frankly web standards didn’t yet exist to allow such a thing to exist. Those were the days when you’d use Flash, Shockwave or Silverlight just to view media content on the web.

                But I do agree, they could be investing right now into feature rich hosted services, but they’ve only half-assed any paid services they’ve tried to integrate and then dropped them because they couldn’t get enough users to make it worth continuing the effort

                • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Exactly because Mozilla was around to see the Internet grow and mature they should have been fit to create such a suite.

              • Auzy@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Yes… Similarly, there are lots of browsers that failed too… KHTML for instance is what Chrome and safari was based off…

                They have a huge number of projects they tried… Including their own mobile phone OS which they were actively shipping (it’s a pity it didn’t survive, would have been nice to have a 3rd OS)

                It’s really a risk / time payoff here. The reality is, when you see projects like this, there are 20 more which fail.

                When you have limited resources, things like Firefox VPN actually make sense, because its low risk (there’s a lot of competitors, but its fast to implement).

                An office suite takes a huge amount of resources, and is a lot of work.

                VPN’s do have their uses. But, I agree… 99% of it is scum marketing

          • Auzy@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Rich guy?

            Presumably that is about Mitchell Baker… A woman… who was there since the beginning when the company was failing…

            The new CEO is also a woman and a temp CEO, who I’m guessing will again be replaced by an existing employee. Which guy are you referring to?

            What browser projects are you assisting with or donating to?

            Are you assisting with any open source projects at all?

            The biggest problem with the oss community is that as a developer, you need to accept always that you’ll get treated like absolute dirt by the community.

            One of my projects went FrontPage on many major Linux sites, and I ended up dropping it because I got tired of the abuse.

            You’ll get plenty of people contributing nothing to your project or competing ones, but they’ll tell you the 50 different ways you suck

            I donated back when Firefox was in beta. They were a dying company back then.

            Are you saying open source developers shouldn’t be rewarded at all?

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Non-profits of the scale that Mozilla is need good talent to continue to exist. Good talent needs to be paid close to market rates to work for non-profits, and retaining good talent requires even better pay and benefits than just what will get good talent in the door

            No matter how much or how little the talent at a nonprofit is paid people will go “why are they paying the CEO a $1 million dollar salary? They could hire 6-8 developers for that much!” “Why are they paying developers 100k/year? Can’t they accept 80k for the privilege of working for such an important bastion of the open internet?”

            15 million a year is a lot but it’s also 1/3 the median CEO pay rate. They have to pay the CEO at least semi-competitively to retain them

          • SunDevil@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I could be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure all donations go to The Mozilla Foundation. I believe the foundation is the decision-making power for the corporation.

            Either way, yes, Mozilla sold their soul to Google (specifically, giving preference to Google Search) in exchange for sustainability (read: survival). Rather difficult to compete in a market where Google and Apple collectively hold upwards of 85% market share for something they provide “free.”

            https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Donations are a tiny fraction of Mozilla’s income. Firefox and related projects are their money earners for their actually charitable projects, pulling in at least half a billion or so a year.

            Not saying that the CEO pay is adequate or something, but your take is literally ignoring the article you yourself quoted.

      • Iceblade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah. I want to donate directly towards the development of FF, but I can’t. I know several other people who of a similar disposition.

  • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Is it tracking you or tracking ads? If it was the latter and it is made public, that is information I’m sure we would all be interested in