Comment by danotdead

Comment by danotdead 3 days ago

5 replies

It’s not about getting overly vitriolic. It’s simply that they said this:

“The Firefox Browser is the only major browser backed by a not-for-profit that doesn’t sell your personal data to advertisers”

And then, they changed it:

https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2025/03/02/mozilla_introduce...

Google also had an unofficial motto: “Don’t be evil” and said:

“Our search results are the best we know how to produce. They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them or for inclusion or more frequent updating”

https://time.com/4060575/alphabet-google-dont-be-evil/

And they changed it.

So- sure, sometimes people change their minds.

But, Google never promised it wouldn’t sell your data.

Mozilla did, and users continued to use it, many without knowledge of it; it should be a banner over all the pages: “Hey, we sell your data. Click here to acknowledge.”

chillingeffect 3 days ago

I cant buy your firefox data.

I can buy a huge block of aggregate data that has some things of yours in it.

  • throwaway6473 3 days ago

    - Advertisers buy user data from Firefox, who can then resell or provide this data to others.

    - Others buy that data.

    - Big data companies and others aggregate this information.

    - Cookie or IP are not necessarily required to identify users; thumbprinting, datetime, and behavioral matching can identify users adequately.

    - Advertisers and analytics giants can ingest data that includes PII, if it’s encrypted, and that can be decrypted.

    - New methods of tracking have replaced old ones and new methods are even better than old ones.

    - This data can be used to group users in many ways, so it can know essentially who you are, when you do things, what you will do, and who you’ll do them with.

    - This information is used for targeting ads, but can be used for other purposes.

    - Technology to utilize this data has been evolving much more quickly.

    - Why just target ads? Why not provide users with a version of reality that optimizes their consumer behavior?

    - Why attempt to ensure control through enforcement? Why not control motivation and thought?

    - Why have political elections? Why not control decisions?

    • aspenmayer 3 days ago

      Firefox isn't supposed to be a business to begin with. Mozilla is a nonprofit organization, isn't it?

      If they can't survive off of donations, then they don't deserve to exist. If they want to sell user data or search defaults, Mozilla should fork Firefox.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2H8wx1aBiQ

      When Zuck said this, I could feel the smarm, but I respect his honesty, and I know what he's not saying. Mozilla is trying to spit the same game about its Google search default deal, as if that is the same thing. It's not, because when Facebook does it, it's a for-profit corporation selling out its users. When Mozilla does it, it's a nonprofit organization selling out its users to the single largest for-profit web property in the history of the Internet.

      Google is a monopolist. They should lose the right to pay off their competition.

      • chillingeffect 15 hours ago

        That's not what a nonprofit is. They do not survive off of donations alone. They have to have a public or charitable purpose. They can sell products and services for any amount or profit. They are required to reinvest the profits and not distribute them to owners.

        • aspenmayer 5 hours ago

          They had my faith until they started selling user data. I've written about this before. When they pulled the Mr. Robot stunt, Mozilla fully jumped the shark while riding Firefox. Let's just say I'm not feeling charitable towards them ever since. I think that's justified.

          Selling user data isn't what Firefox is; it's what Mozilla is. Firefox is free software.