389

Mozilla drops new Privacy Note and Terms of Service; People are saying it is Bad News (blog.mozilla.org)

submitted 2 days ago by whydudothatdrcrane@lemmy.ml to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

93 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Not a good look for Firefox. Third partners and device fingerprinting clearly mentioned in the documents.

The move is the latest development in a series of shifts Mozilla has undergone over the past year.

The gecko engine and Firefox forks, such as Tor, Mullvad, Librewolf, and Arkenfox, are stables of private, open source web browsing.

In fact, Mozilla's is one of the few browser engines out there, in a protocol-heavy industry that many say only corporate or well-funded non-profits can reliably develop.

What is more, daily driving the more hardened-for-privacy Firefox derivatives can be frowned upon by many sites, including your bank and workplace.

Mozilla's enshittification leaves the open source community without a good alternative to Firefox, after years of promoting it as a privacy-friendly alternative to spyware-cum-browser Chrome.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 28 points 2 days ago

Have you considered what is driving this change?

Looking from the sidelines, I think it's all about money, specifically, how to make the development of Firefox sustainable. Yes, I'm aware of the cynical view that this is about lining the pockets of the CEO, I have no evidence for this.

I think that's essentially caused by how we have licensed open source software and had limited resources to combat abuse at the industrial scale that silicon valley companies have monetized other people's work.

Bruce Perens is attempting to erect "Post Open", but I'm not yet sure if that is going to solve the fundamental issues.

Disclaimer: I've worked a little on the community standards document for the post open project.

[-] tomatolung@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

Being halfway between both sides, I can see the need for a monetary model to sustain development, yet I am challenged by the opacity that this feels like. The OP's point that it feels like a downward slide toward principles compromise is challenging. Especially in light of the enshittification of everything lately, Mozilla needs to do a better job communicating how this is not going down that path and yet also trying to sustain itself.

[-] Aelis@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

Being halfway between both sides

People really need to stop playing devil advocate, «Especially in light of the enshittification of everything lately». Mozilla has gone downhill for a good while now, being gentled by sweet Google money and spending it in trends far too late only to waste it, employees keep getting fired while the CEO gets a regular raise and Firefox barely got improved over the years. And now they want to jump head first into AI, way too late again, all the while we already know all AI compagnies run at a tremendous loss. Can you even call that « trying to sustain itself» at this point ? Seems surreal to me.

All I really see is another breach of trust in a full history of mistakes, probably the last one.

[-] Coldmoon@sh.itjust.works -5 points 2 days ago

Centrism is apathy and sucks

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Reductionism is lazy and sucks. You didn't even read the comment you responded to, you're just mad that not everyone is upset enough for you.

[-] Coldmoon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

No, not particularly. I’m not that upset myself, I recently switched to Librewolf. I just get annoyed at what I perceive as statements that ride the fence. Privacy is not a place to give ground on.

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 7 points 2 days ago

Did it ever occur to you that people can have a mix of views that don't fully conform to one ideology or another? It's a spectrum, not riding the fence. Like politics, not everything is a team sport.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

I suppose Mozilla should lock the doors and institute slave labor rather than find some way of paying their employees that might be construed by you to be giving up privacy

[-] Coldmoon@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

Now that’s a mental leap to get there.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Oh, I thought we have to take extreme positions

[-] Coldmoon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

Well if that’s the case just dismantle the whole thing and return to the woods

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago

I'm glad you see my point

[-] Coldmoon@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago

https://lemmy.zip/post/32996169

Yeah bro we should totally be chill with this bro it’s just a TOS bro they have to pay their employees bro

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago

Say bro a few more times -- it really makes me look unintelligent that you both do that and can't understand a view that isn't black/white

[-] Coldmoon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

bro this is embarrassing bro. please bro.

woosh

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

I got the joke you were trying to make, poorly. It just wasn't funny.

[-] tomatolung@lemmy.world -3 points 2 days ago

That's an idiotic statement. Realism or understanding what realpolitik is in a political situation is far more likely to allow you find and develop change in an organization, as well keep you from wasting your time on useless leverage points. In this case knowing both frames of reference is valuable so that action can be taken, as opposed to just writing five words.