Firefox deletes promise to never sell personal data, asks users not to panic | Mozilla says it deleted promise because "sale of data" is defined broadly
Firefox deletes promise to never sell personal data, asks users not to panic | Mozilla says it deleted promise because "sale of data" is defined broadly
Mozilla says it deleted promise because “sale of data” is defined broadly.
Firefox maker Mozilla deleted a promise to never sell its users' personal data and is trying to assure worried users that its approach to privacy hasn't fundamentally changed. Until recently, a Firefox FAQ promised that the browser maker never has and never will sell its users' personal data. An archived version from January 30 says:
Does Firefox sell your personal data?
Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That's a promise.
That promise is removed from the current version. There's also a notable change in a data privacy FAQ that used to say, "Mozilla doesn't sell data about you, and we don't buy data about you."
The data privacy FAQ now explains that Mozilla is no longer making blanket promises about not selling data because some legal jurisdictions define "sale" in a very broad way:
Mozilla doesn't sell data about you (in the way that most people think about "selling data"), and we don't buy data about you. Since we strive for transparency, and the LEGAL definition of "sale of data" is extremely broad in some places, we've had to step back from making the definitive statements you know and love. We still put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share with our partners (which we need to do to make Firefox commercially viable) is stripped of any identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).
Mozilla didn't say which legal jurisdictions have these broad definitions.
The screw-ups keep mounting like they want to be Google.
They (and we)'ve got to admit, the solution is not going to come from within their (managerial) ranks.
At this point I'd be happy to offer my services as a BDFL for Mozilla, at but a small fraction of the wages of any of their C-suites.
They're cash strapped and cash strapped companies are the worst when it comes to being trustworthy. That's all the calculus that needs to be done.
They're not that cash strapped though. Their blog post says that they need the revenue to 'grow', and they go on to talk about the new people they've added to the board. So it isn't really about getting enough money to survive. It's about getting money to support a top-heavy company structure.
How about asking for money? I'd gladly pay if they stripped out a bunch of the nonsense they do and focus on making a better browser. Or keep that crap and let me donate directly to Firefox development.
I'd gladly pay if they stripped out a bunch of the nonsense
I donate to FOSS often, but I dont have a ton of money. Most will donate nothing, and that is fine part of this is altruistic, but I think its easy to forget that donations only go so far. A web browser is also a very big project and will need a lot more funds too.
It does not help that Mozilla is in a odd situation on what they can do to raise funds and not move away from their core mission.
Google really needs to be broken up. They've become the Ma Bell of the internet.
https://thehackernews.com/2025/03/mozilla-updates-firefox-terms-again.html?m=1
Apparently they changed it due to backlash.
Glad they clarified. To me the "selling data being defined broadly" argument made sense in the context of Google paying them to be included as a search provider. Because there is an argument that Google paying Firefox, and then the user entering a search and that being sent to Google's servers could be legally seen as Mozilla selling data to Google.
Hm. Reading further in the article and since its not the first no-no.. I have doubts.
I don't like this but it's gonna take more for me to switch. I am very happy with Firefox for my use-case and workflow it works really well. However I think they are shooting themselves in the foot by starting to take away some of the most crucial advantages with Firefox compared to Chrome. I mean if both are awful for privacy then why use Firefox?
Mind you, this is just step one and other steps WILL follow. Mozilla looked at other enshittified products from large companies that make a lot of money and thought "we could have that too!"
It's a pattern I keep seeing, over and over. This is the end of Firefox as we knew it. I'm sure a good fork, run by a non profit foundation will sprout soon enough, but the name for a privacy browser won't be Firefox no more
Maybe. I'll certainly check out alternatives, but I'm not panicking just yet. It's not hard to switch browsers, so I'll just test out options while seeing how things shake out.
And what they say about being commercially viable is true, they can't die on this hill. It means death of complete privacy either way.
Mozilla are a non profit organisation. Their recent blog post says that they will invest in advertising to increase short-term revenue that they need to "grow". The blog goes on to talk about the increase in board members, and new leaders being added. The CEO and these new leaders are highly paid...
To me this looks bad. It looks to me that Mozilla's new leaders have pushed out the old; and are now moving towards advertising and selling user data not because they need it to stabilise and survive, but because they need it to pay the people making the decision to burn trust and reputation. It has become a top-heavy organisation, and greed has seeped in.
A few people will be self-enriched by this, and then the orgasation will be weaker as a result.
If you're going to a Chromium browser, at least go to Vivaldi since it's a) based on Chromium not Chrome and b) not based in the US.
The only bad thing it has going for it is that it uses the Chrome web store for extensions.
VIvaldi is cool, but its not open source. If you worry about the trustworthiness of you browser, picking an open source one would be best IMO. Among the chromium-based, there are chromium itself, brave, ...
We still put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share with our partners (which we need to do to make Firefox commercially viable) is stripped of any identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate,
Fuck off Mozilla. Maybe don't pay CEOs millions and don't force things like Pocket and LLMs on users if you want to be commercially viable, I'd gladly pay for Firefox that doesn't make me dodge new features and services. But it would be a donation towards development of a browser that is commons, since you have no product to sell, only GPL'd code that's mine as much as yours.
You have NO fucking leverage, Firefox is better than Chrome, but there's projects that will gladly repackage your code with no telemetry whatsoever for any platform while you're brainstorming just the right amount of monetization to prevent the frog from jumping.
It's kind of sad I don't use Chrome and therefore never think of it, while I like and use Firefox and am therefore constantly at odds with Mozilla.
A lot of these browsers seems to be obsessed with AI that nobody wants.
I see it said agian and agian. because its true. Firefox is one of, if not the best of the mainstream browsers. (Not included its many forks) but Mozilla is a horrible caretaker of it. Mozilla does not focus on firefox and they dont care/believe in it nearly as much as its users or devs who fork it.
The motivations of a company are extremely important, and has Mozilla does not care for a lightweight, good, privacy centric browser, the enshitification will and has corrupt firefox.
It's only a matter of time until it is as bad as chromium or flat out joins it.
Considering how critical a browser is these days.
I'm surprised there isn't a very popular Open-Source one that everyone is using.
It's because it's hard to maintain a browser. There's lots of protocols and engines and other moving pieces; I remember when web pages would render in Netscape but not Internet Explorer, for example.
We take for granted how seamless and ubiquitous the internet is, but there were lots of headaches as internet devs decided to adopt or include different users (or not).
And now, it would take a lot of effort and market upset to convince the capitalist overlords to include something new in their dev stack. The barrier to entry is monumentally high, so most people don't bother to try inventing something better.
Ive seen a few foss options but they generally lack certain features alot of people have gotten used to either because they cant implement them or it was committed for privacy/resource reasons.
So it becomes a balance of features vs privacy and right now fire fox has been a good enough balance there hasn't been enough backing for a "good" feature rich foss that less computer adept users can easily install and migrate to.
I don't know why they haven't floated the idea of some kind of subscription or one-time payment (though a subscription might be just as infuriating). I'm not above paying for software and if it was a reasonable price, say $10 one-time, I'd much prefer that over it becoming the new Chrome.
Could you imagine the enshittification cries if they did this. “Mozilla to add subscription model to your browser”.
They have other products that have subscriptions you can pay for to support the company.
Instead of using Mullvad, use Mozilla VPN (it is literally exactly the same, you just pay Mozilla not Mullvad)
If you’re a web developer, Subscribe to MDN Plus.
Hate spam? Firefox Relay.
I’m pretty sure a $10 one time payment won’t pay for the costs of development that Firefox requires.
Open source only works when there are people motivated enough and skilled enough to maintain something for free or when the organization managing it has another source of income.
They're already dying. This would be throwing themselves in the grave. People aren't used to paying for browsers
Do Firefox forks allow us to avoid this enshittification or will they also be affected as well?
In theory yes. But remember that Chrome is based on Chromium which is open source. But nobody has stepped up to do a viable hard fork to take power away from Google.
Maintaining a modern browser is a huge undertaking which is why almost nobody except Google, Mozilla, and Apple are really even trying. Even Microsoft threw in the towel.
The more bad stuff is added to Firefox the harder it will be for any forks to keep up removing it while also keeping it up to date. Will anyone step up?
Yes, they allow full avoidance of any potential data collection through the browser, if they remove the collection features.
Mozilla would need to change their licensing terms to prevent forks from being able to remove things like that, and forks could just use the last version of the code before the license change and just backport new features.
Also Firefox is fully open source, unlike chromium which relies on a closed source binary blob in the middle. Some chromium forks have replaced the binary blob with open source code, but the default is for chromium forks to have a nice chunk in them controlled by google that no one can deeply inveatigate what it does. Firefox does not have this issue.
Mozilla can't hide any potential data collection in Firefox due to the full open source nature (unlike chrome forks). They also can't stop fork devs from stripping out any data collection functions. And as of today, they have not introduced any data collection that is not supremely anonymized, and they have not introduced any data collection that cannot be opted out of through the browser settings (and about:config).
I don’t believe Mozilla doesn’t have the best interests of the browser at heart, I believe that they do think their browser is the their number one product.
But that’s the problem. It’s free software, going up against a juggernaut whose browser is just another side project to drive engagement with their core product.
A juggernaut who just so happens to be one of Mozilla’s primary source of income. All it will take is a little bit of legislation somewhere in the world to make that deal less attractive and Mozilla could be dead in the water. And it will take all of those forks with it, paving the way for Google to become the true web Hegemony.
Mozilla needs to diversify to ensure they can continue to provide stewardship to the browser.
But trying to make money in 2025 just seems to summon the enshittification brigade.
Free software is not free. Someone has to make it.
Have they considered just asking for money? Also getting rid of the giant holes that they keep pouring their money into?
A lot of people love Firefox, and would happily donate. They could also trim a lot of fat at Mozilla quite easily.
Chromium is bad only in your head. It's a fucking rendering engine with different incarnations. How can this be bad? And no, FF is not "the best", otherwise it wouldn't have the shitty market share it actually has.
Found the t3.gg enjoyer
Each person has thier own opinion. I have used IE, edge, before it went chromium and have used chrome. They work, and if you get into the ecosystem they work really well, but if you don't want to be in the ecosystem or try to stop some it, I ran into problems.
When I just accepted all google ecosystem products, chrome worked great, when I needed to use alternate google accounts for school I ran into issues. So I moved to edge and it worked fine, except for with google I ran into issues, then it became chromium.
Then ads, and popups being an ad company, google doesn't like supporting ad or content blockers, which makes sense but ublock has been so great at blocking unwanted popups and ads and as far as I am aware it doesn't wirk as well on chromium based browsers, or at all.
So agian Chromium is a solid system and if you don't care to change it it can work grest for you, but I found trying to change it to suit my needs as been problematic, in ways firefox or some fork of it hasn't been.
If you are happy with Chrome or Edge or whatnot, great, there isn't a problem but I want other options, I want more options about how it works, how it runs on my system and what data it collects or shows, things chromium doesn't support.
Mozilla needs to understand that I don't want it to have my data to sell or not in the first place.
That's the thing that bothers me about all these companies now. My data is my data, not theirs. They shouldn't even be allowed to collect it, let alone sell it or give it to anyone who wants it.
Nahhh, trust them, bro. People working on other things with the same product name as their company name were great people. That should be endorsement enough.
Wait. They have this 'open source' flag. If they wave it about - oooh, pretty - does that help?
Just uncheck all telemetry and never use an account. Its open source so it should be verifiable that data collection is turned off.
Mozilla posted an update:
Update at 10:20 pm ET: Mozilla has since announced a change to the license language to address user complaints. It now says, "You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. This includes processing your data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice. It also includes a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox. This does not give Mozilla any ownership in that content."
Why they need users ? If they operate Firefox by themselves why they not start paying for power usage for hosting Firefox on my machine.
My thoughts as well, there is always another option
This whole thing does not matter if you are living in the US anyway become of the Third-party doctrine that holds that people who voluntarily give information to third parties have "no reasonable expectation of privacy in that information.
I wonder how much this affects things if you’ve already gone through Firefox’s settings to max out privacy and turn off all telemetry.
I resisted switching to Librewolf because Firefox works great (including M365 in Linux at work) and seemed to have the options you’d want for privacy and security.
This doesn’t feel like an emergency, especially in a chrome/edge dominated world. But it’s back on the list of things to investigate transitioning away from.
Yep. It stinks. We'll see if it was just a fart and it'll go away or if they crapped and we'll have to jump ship.
Maybe we should all throw some kind of support behind https://ladybird.org/ with an eye to the future.
That project isn’t problematic for some reason I haven’t heard about, is it?
(Problematic other than web browsers being gigantic pieces of software, and ladybrid itself not even being in alpha yet)
Anyone still using Firefox after this probably hasn't been keeping up with Mozilla's many controversies. If this is your first time here, I can see why you'd decide to overlook it. I did for a long time, but this is the final straw for me. Luckily, instead of building anything useful over the past decades, Mozilla leadership has been instead focused on enriching themselves. That means deleting my Mozilla account right now was easy.
I've now moved to LibreWolf, because I don't want to support Chromium's dominance, but if that project dies out I'll jump ship. It'll be a real shame if the world gets stuck with Chromium as the only viable browser, but it won't be my fault. It will be Mozilla leadership's fault.
Jump ship to what? It seems like going to Tor browser full time might be the answer?
I'm just not sure what the steps are from Librewolf to More private.
It makes me sad because I'm a donator and supporter to Mozilla - and have been for years. I truly believe the web should be open, free, and not for profit and there are great people at Mozilla which is why I hate seeing the leadership do things like this. I wish there was an active group that shared the same ideals, were ethical, and not full of transphobes and cryptobros that could take up the mantle and fund another fork like Librewolf.
Preferably would love that any group be a collective not a corporation.
Yup. I might switch to Waterfox this weekend
I moved to LibreWolf a couple of months ago. I'll move further away if I need to.
This is why I am an advocate for publicly-funded Internet, like how people fund NPR and BBC.
I don't blame Firefox because at the end of the day, they are still a business and need to cover the operating cost. I blame the system that we're in and the elites will tell you there is no other alternative.
and the elites will tell you there is no other alternative
That's like blaming wolves for eating you when it's winter, they are hungry and you are in the forest
We are still in a capitalistic. Money still prevails.
What operating costs? You could argue there are development costs, but development is driven by the community. The only operating costs are forced stalking behavior.
I don't understand what you mean by Firefox's development is driven by the community? It's not a community contributed open source software; my friend worka on Firefox and is a Mozilla employee.
I'm sorry, but first of all Mozilla actually employs developers. And the development process isn't just the developers' salaries. There's R&D, QA, management, administration, accounting. All of these cost money, and this isn't even touching on the expenses associated with offices (electricity, general upkeep, maintenance).
Then there's the costs associated with packaging the binaries, hosting the binaries, bandwidth...
Even if you're giving everyone a miser's pay, and getting cheaper unreliable hosting, it adds up
I can't remember the details, but if I remember correctly, Firefox used to get a lot of cut from hosting Google's ad. But Google cut that deal and Firefox lost 90% of its revenue as a result. That's why I can't blame Firefox for doing what they are doing at the moment.
Us users want services for free but we can't have our cake and eat them in the current paradigm of the internet. That's why we have to think outside the box and I advocate for a publicly funded internet. It is the same model as NPR and BBC and that is why they have little to no ads unlike private broadcasters. The same principle should be applied to the Internet if we want to keep using it for free.
I'm about to get my tattoo removed wtf
Just get "RIP" tattooed under it.
If it's really you...
Wtf?
It is lmfao it was my first one 🥲
Would you like to see my tattoo of Tom from MySpace I got on my left testicle? Hey man, in 2005 it seemed like MySpace Tom would be in our lives forever. Why WOULDN'T you get his profile picture inked into your body with needles on the most painful part of your body? It made sense in 2005!
But noooooooooo! Facebook had to be a dick. And now whenever I pull my pants down in front of some hot 20 year old with daddy issues, she's like "Is that your uncle or something?"
Meanwhile Tom sold my MySpace for hundreds of millions of dollars, and now does photography of bikini models on his yacht! While I have to explain who Tom is to Gen Z....
sigh
You’re a good friend
Edit: also the style shows through, not everyone can get a watercolor vibe without the water
It's actually not watercolor, I'm just old and I don't wear sunscreen 😂 take care of your ink, kids
I remember a time when Google wrote "Don't be evil" all over their stuff.....
dude i worked in a buncha different college libraries around the time of google's initial ascension. Google slayed. it was awesome, in 2000.
now? google is a drippy search engine.
There's a phrase that is still very close to that in some company statement still, I sort of view it as pointless to talk about. We know they're evil by their actions, and they were evil before they removed it in sure. If the statement is what matters, it's still basically there, just not the motto. It's just not worth worrying or talking about. They do so much worse shit. A friend of mine was recently let go after protesting about their response to the genocide in Gaza.
I don't get how something is allowed to be labeled "free" when the terms of usage make you barter your data.
There are different kinds of free. Free beer, free speech and free weekend are three different kinds of free that software can have, but not necessarily at the same time.
I was thinking more along the lines of "install and play this free unity game while it siphons personal data off your computer and sends it back to epic servers"
They're specifically getting something of value in return for the good or service and then claiming it's free and that customers are not customers, merely "users."
but all of those taste better with free beer
They can't just promise they "never will" and then get rid of it. People who used the service under the original agreement should still be able to claim that benefit since it was promising to never sell it.
There’s also Servo by the Linux Foundation and Ladybird.
These are actual different browsers and engines all together compared to FF spin-offs.
I'm still super waiting for Lady Bird. I cannot wait to give it a try, but it's gonna be like 2026 before they start rolling out builds for general use.
I'm excited for these to mature but they are still developing and would not recommend them for regular use
I read somewhere that Librewolf is not recommended because they are a small team and slow to patch vulnerabilities / integrate security fixes from Firefox.
Is it true? (Sincere question)
Valid concern as I use their browser often. From their FAQ (link):
No User Tracking
We don't collect personal information from users. We don't track users. We don't sell user data. We have no affiliation with any advertising companies.
Ironfox for Android?
Too new to recommend, IMO.
Added
Also Zen Browser
Added
iOS browsers are all just skins around the safari engine.
Brave is fine with for iOS with build in adblocker
Since we strive for transparency, and the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is extremely broad in some places, we’ve had to step back from making the definitive statements you know and love. We still put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share with our partners (which we need to do to make Firefox commercially viable)
So in other words we sell your data and get paid for it, and some countries won't let us lie about it.
Yeah, I think it would be very fucking easy to say "we don't sell your data" by any definition... Literally all you need to do is not fucking sell people's data
Probably caving into googles demands
That clarification is not making me calm
I mean you could argue that them defaulting to Google search is already them selling your data. Google definitely pay them for that.
I don't quite understand what the backlash is here. The article is about FAQs on the Mozilla website. It seems reasonable that some people might interpret "sell" to be accepting money to set the default browser to Google. Clarifying that on their site seems fine. The FAQ was surely never legally binding.
Their 'Terms of Use' document is new as of Feb 26 AFAIK. Is that what people are upset by?
Make sense since they receive funding from Google, Google might be demanding too much or removing funding
Google can't fund firefox anymore because of the US federal courts have ruled google a monopoly.
I use brave and librewolf, anybody know if those are still safe from this dort of thing? (Probably not I guess, so what browsers are left?)
Librewolf is privacy-hardened so it's probably the best option. Brave is Chromium-based. Realistically though, all web browsers come with compromises, and internet anonymity is virtually impossible without unrealistic amounts of effort.
Someone earlier said that brave was based on chrome and when google blocked ublock origin on Chrome, it would stop working on brave too.
Gahhhh this is horrible
I spent some time switching to Librewolf this morning but at the end of the day, it having Firefox as the upstream means it’s all fragile and tenuous anyway
I installed Librewolf despite being a furry that loves foxes and it legit fixed every Firefox issue I had. But they were all local issues.
Switched to librewolf the other day, and it's great
Been using it all day now and yeah, it’s very smooth sailing. The tweaks I made basically involved removing fingerprinting protection, which I saw people online deride as “defeating the entire purpose of Librewolf”. Well, not true anymore.
I just want manifest v2 and to not have to consent to ToS agreements implicitly allowing some suspicious organisation to harvest and sell literally any keypress I enter into the browser, which has become the de facto cross platform way to do almost everything.
Son of a bitch I just got back into Firefox.
Get in loser, we’re going to librewolf apparently. Fuck me I’ve reached the age of seeing all the things I like die. I don’t even remember a time I didn’t use Firefox. God damn it
Icecat's good too. In fact in some ways, eg. cutting Sync out entirely where LibreWolf disables it by default but lets you enable it if desired, it's even better than LibreWolf.
Try LibreWolf then
I haven't been presented with any Ts and C's. Do they apply if I already installed Firefox before this?
Don’tbe evilplease pay me if you want to sell my data. At the end of the day I am a business and need to cover operating cost.
Is there an open source tool to generate fake user activity data for Firefox to consume?
So sad. I have used Firefox since 2006. Today I removed it for good from all of my devices. So long old friend. I cant wait for Ladybird to release.
what is your current open source / FOSS alternative?
LibreWolf on desktop and Fennec on phone.
zen i heard is good. probably gonna give it a try one of these days
Don't collect anything on your own and don't sell the things you don't collect. Bam, problem solved.
Which jurisdictions? What kind of broad way? Give one example please. I dare you.
If Firefox is losing its footing as a privacy focused browser then where do we go? If your on Mac maybe Safari?
Any of the Firefox forks. This is Mozilla not Firefox that is making these decisions.
Perhaps Ladybird once it's released?
we should all support ladybird project in hope for accelerated development. alpha in 2026, beta in 2027, stable in 2028. thats a long waiting time
zen, ladybird, waterfox are some that i've heard of before. zen is out now. idk about the others. one of my friends uses zen and it's pretty neat.
zen is still unstable. random errors and bugs show up very often
Several questions:
- How are they getting our data?
- What is the nature of the data?
- Can we do anything in about:config?
How are they getting our data?
By setting up small pieces of code that trigger when you use a given feature, and send a network request to Mozilla's servers with either a single flag set to just show a feature was used, in general, or more additional data with context (e.g. how long the text is that users are putting into their new AI sidebar feature)
What is the nature of the data?
This section of their Privacy Notice explains what categories of telemetry data they collect.
Can we do anything in about:config?
None needed. The normal settings menu has you covered. Go to
Settings>Privacy & Security>Firefox Data Collection and Use>Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla
At least Ecosia plants trees, and the way those trees produce oxygen and absorb CO2 is a benefit to me.
Am I the only one here who's pretty much okay with this? I do wish they'd clarify exactly what they mean by "Mozilla doesn't sell data about you (in the way that most people think about 'selling data')," but having my anonymized data sold so that Mozilla can continue to operate (combined with Firefox being the best browser I've used in terms of both performance and flexibility - ability to install add-ons from sources outside of the Mozilla store, for example) - seems like a worthy tradeoff to me.
They also have an option to opt-out of data collection, which I do wish was opt-in instead, but with the way every other mainstream browser operates I'm just happy the option is there at all. Let me know if there's something I'm missing here though.
The problem I have with this is that "anonymized" data in the past has often been trivial to de-anonymize. And if they can remove some promises now, they're going to keep going in that direction. Just like Microsoft telemetry used to be less but is getting worse and worse.
Do you have any sources about anonymized data being easy to de-anonymize? I've been hearing a lot of conflicting stuff regarding the policy change so I wanna make sure the information I'm getting is accurate. But yeah if Firefox implements more anti consumer policies like this I will probably be jumping ship.
They could make it more specific. Instead they just removed it.
I'm not trying to unilaterally defend the decision, it's just not going to make me personally switch browsers. From what I'm hearing a lot of the viable alternatives are forks of Firefox anyway.
To generalise, just as Reddit is the neolib centrist hivemind and Facebook is the conservative boomer hivemind, Lemmy is some overlap of privacy/techy/ultrapolitical groups - so whenever you get this kind of news that is ultimately pretty mild and uncontroversial to most you get lots of Lemmings buttons pushed and what seems like an oversized reaction in the comments.
Is Firefox perfect? No. Is it still the best available mainstream browser option? Yes. And if the small groups that presently use it walk away and its tiny market share (~5%) declines to a point where Firefox becomes insolvent - well then browsers will be just a two-horse race between Google (Chromium) and Apple (WebKit). Every web spec and page will be beholden to the desires of those companies - I'm sure the same Lemmings will be complaining about that too, and by then it will be too late to realize what they've lost.
It was a neolib site, but it's starting to lean right wing, and soon will.be with the ranks of Facebook soon enough. The reason, they have been aggressively banning accounts as of late, and alot of its based around trump posts. They allow heavy astroturfing from the right, either from troll farms or conservative comments, you report them you will get banned. Many people criticized the site for pushing so many trump sanewashing posts in the front page, the conservative sub have been consistently in the front page for a while, before you almost never hear a peep from them, unless it's being talked about in other subs
What's the next Android browser I'm installing fam?
I just have friends send me memes to my clamshell flip phone through SMS
Get your ham license and send them by SSTV over the air. Truly decentralized. https://youtu.be/Yak__tnFHKs
Is friends on GitHub?
I just wish it wasn't using blink
palemoon is just firefox from the pre quantum days before the webextension enshittification and all they need is a decent mobile app and their own sync
lmao another Mozilla shitshow
grabs popcorn 🍿
so is this them trying to protect its users while adding nuance for the sake of legal protections, or is this them pretending to do that in order to profit off its users?
so long firefox👋
Where are you going?
Tor/Mullvad are the only acceptable options if you genuinely want the best for your privacy. Mullvad browser is a bit less of a hassle than Tor but not by much. If adamant about staying away from Gecko (Firefox) and Chromium browsers then WebKit forked browsers are sort of the last options.
At this point I'm beginning to look at going online as something that is inherently dangerous (for lack of a better word) and that needs to be done with care. There is no meaningful way to stay private anymore, and by connecting and interacting you are always painting a target on your back with long-lasting consequences that we can't imagine yet. It's not looking great right now, my dudes.
Trust me bro
Yup I'll be sticking with Firefox forks.. Unfortunately i have to keep a chrome install around because i can't get alternative browsers to do redirects for PayPal
Hm? Paypal redirects work for me, even in my browsing profile with trimmed useragent and strict same-origin/cookie policy. This one was never a problem, even if no other webäpp worked. Seems they have good fallbacks.
the problem with that is - if everyone switches to forks, development of firefox stops, killing it, and the forks are guaranteed to follow.
Have you tried "un-googled chromium"? Should work pretty much the same as regular chromium in that regard...
Or even just a good old fashioned user agent switcher?
+1 for agent switcher
Everything turns to shit in the end.
Yeah, these guys were late participants in the browser wars. They aren't your friends.
With all things the same i just use duckduckgo because.... ducks!
Sorry, I'm lost..
Who are you referring to the was late to the browser wars?
Duckduckgo's browser uses webview as it's main engine, which means that on a phone it will simply use blink (chromium) on Android and Windows device or webkit on Apple devices.
my other comment is here about the acting CEO of Mozilla, Laura Chambers, and asking about potential connections to Musk and Thiel.
https://lemmy.world/comment/15382904
I just got an alert that I need to update my FF browser before March 14th. that's another date that keeps coming up.
March 14th is the
- date of the next government shutdown due to budget negotiations
- 53 days after trump took office (same amount of days it took Hitler to destroy German democracy before WW2
- date that a major root certificate ends on(what once was) one of the most privacy focused browsers that will break existing add-ons and potentially break/expose you online
- date of a total lunar eclipse (it perfectly frames the US in the middle, serious go look it up)
don't forget that the ides of march is march 15th, as well as March is named after Mars the God of War.
I'm no mystic, but symbolism is important to megalomaniacs.
anyone else know of other important technological or political events happening on March 14th?
In 1900 on March 14th the Gold Standard Act was ratified in America, forcing the dollar to be redeemable by the Treasury on demand for a fixed value in gold. It was abandoned in 1933 during the Great Depression (which really was not all that great from what I've read).
In 1943 Kraków Ghetto ceased to have prisoners. Less great than that depression.
1964 Jack Ruby was convicted of assassinating JFK.
1879 Einstein's birthday.
1883 Karl Marx's death.
Anyone recommend an iOS alternative?
On iOS, all browsers are Safari with a coat of paint.
Nowadays that’s incorrect if you’re in the European Union.
How good is mullvad browser?
I have been advised it's not a fork but a reconfig of default firefox, therefore it would technically be subject to the same ToS.
Edit: here's where I got that (with a link to the cfg) https://lemmy.world/comment/15368938
I'm using Fennec (based on Firefox, sans telemetry). Is there a good, reliable, and trustable way to export my bookmarks so I don't have to depend on Firefox Sync?
Edit: forgot to say: on Android.
You can run your own sync server in Docker.
I use Floccus cause it syncs to nextcloud bookmarks.
I realized mozilla is cooked a few months ago when i read this issue where it has taken them TWELVE YEARS to implement a date picker
Between the fact I've been using a date picker for ages in Firefox, the fact dates and times are hard, and the title of the issue that's clearly a zombie issue. I'm surprised they were able to close it at all.
They have also had this issue open for 20 years.
And this amounts to just allowing the user to specify a different directory for Firefox on Linux (~/.mozilla is terrible).
Frankly unacceptable.
Aaaand that's why I switched to Brave. If you have shit performance and are selling my data, what's the redeeming quality? 8gb of RAM should be enough to browse the internet. IDK why Firefox insists it isn't....
If this is not a parody, I implore you to at least…read the Wikipedia page?
Lol Brave... Ok
Brave did have some bad habits (and i think still has) so personally i would not trust them with my data. You could look for a firefox based browser like Zen (the most beautyful of them all) or stick to any other privacy first chromium based like vivaldi or mullvad.
The general rule: the less features, the more privacy And if features are needed there are addons
I feel a little vindicated. I started using Firefox basically when it was first released. I migrated away from it after several years because I simply didn't like the direction that Mozilla was taking it. Decades later I see them struggling down the same inevitable path I figured they'd always head down from the beginning.
Firefox bros used to get ultra pissed at me for shitting on their browser because I just knew Mozilla would eventually fuck it all up. And here we are.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say. I told ya so? I was smarter than everyone else and figured it out first?
FF has been one of the better full-featured browsers with generous amount of add-ons/plugins. There was no reason not to use it vs some less functional browser or some corporate data miner like Chrome. It still is, however some alternatives are catching up. Time will tell how it all shakes out as far as the battle between functionality, privacy, ad- and tracking-blockers, and people willing to build and maintain free browsers and plugins.
What are you using now?
What has your choice of browser(s) been throughout the past decade?
lolololol
Women CEOs are as shit as Male CEOs. Who would have thunk the war of the sexes was a cause dangled in front of the bougies so the elite could parasitise free from fear of popular revolt huh?
Fucking what?
What the fuck are you even talking about? What kind of brain rot pushes a person to bring this shit up out of the blue?
This was essentially my same reaction to that comment. All I can think is that they imagined that this post said something like "Firefox bad because DEI CEO!" and reacted without actually reading the post.
Which ... I mean, given the world we currently live in, is probably being said somewhere. But on this post, it's a HECK of a non-sequitur.
I read somewhere that women CEO are often chosen when the company is declining or about to fail, as a way to take the blame off from themselves. So your comment seems kind of misogynistic and saying women are just as bad, but you are not accounting for the misogyny in the corporate world. In many cases a male dominated BOD often use women as a scapegoat for their failings, musks twitter for example, he hides behind a woman to take criticism off himself. Women also earn significantly less than men in the same position. Another is YouTube's Late ceo. Theranos had Holmes, but if you look further she was chosen to be the face by a male BOD
Sex, gender, sexual orientation, skin colour are red herrings used to distract the people from the fact they have a boot on their neck. The replies to my comment are yet another evidence people are OK licking the boot as long as the party is "insert preference here". The problem is not particular to any of the aforementioned classes, the problem is the incentive structure is broken and the fiduciary duty is enshrined in law rather than good governance and long term sustainability. Firefox is just another evidence that cheerleading for a CEO because of intrinsic characteristics is a folly.
These are two separate things. Men and women are all human beings and are OF COURSE capable of being shitty or good on the same level. But it's important to give the same opportunity to both, there's no reason one of the sexes should be discriminated against. Women are still not equal in many ways (the exact ways depending on the particular society).
They are often used as scapegoats in the CEO position, when the company gets really bad reputation. Musk being an obvious example of X, chose a woman as a human shield
