I actually don't agree, and the reason is - non tech people. You and me can install plugins but ordinary people don't do that. So the default experience must be good, offering improvements to the experience over Google Chrome.
Otherwise all privacy features could also be plugins. Imagine if that was true. Firefox would have no identity and you would have to install plugins and make it your own.
So some features should be built in. Maybe the ability to get pop-ups about false reviews will actually make users go "wow that is so useful".
Compromise: Develop it as a Plugin and then install it by default. That way people who don't want the feature can easily remove it completely. That approach would likely also reduce the number of Firefox forks whose sole purpose is to remove the new features some consider bloat.
Agreed. This is well outside the scope of native browser functions. Firefox already has a rich extensions ecosystem. They can just include the extension with the browser by default for all I care, but as a native feature, this makes no sense.
I agree and I worry about what options they'll remove from about:config next to make room for or force the acceptance of new features like they have a habit of doing.
Amazon only operates in 58 countries, so it's basically useless for everyone else. But the company they acquired (fakespot) seems to do more than amazon, but that still does not make it worth packaging it with the browser
I bought an 4.7 rated amplifier on Amazon that broke the first day. Looking at the reviews closer, I noticed they were 100% paid reviewers.
When I tried to leave a negative review, Amazon stopped me, giving a generic message about fake reviews on this product. This product is still out their with a high rating and no way for actual purchasers like me to warn other customers.
Tried to leave a big detailed helpful negative review and it gets flagged for being suspicious, with no copy of the review attached so I have to write it all again. And then it gets removed again.
I just looked in my emails. The exact phrasing was "We have reviewed our decisions and concluded that the product you received is authentic. As a result, we removed your review specific to this product. This ensures other customers see reviews that reflect the current shopping experience."
Most recently it happened with a body trimmer, where I never questioned the inauthenticity, and then a zojirushi travel mug that I genuinely believe was a fake, and attached a lot of evidence.
They've blocked my review on a shower chair that was absolutely not rated for what they said. I nearly fell on my butt and my skinnier partner said it was too wobbly. They've blocked the negative review 5 times saying I questioned the authenticity of the product and they have confirmed it. I knew it was Medline brand. I've had to file a FTC complaint which I expect to be worthless.
Why would this hurt Amazon? People will just see a different set of reviews. It's manufacturers if crappy knock-off products that should be shaking in their boots.
Well I'll always use Firefox, no question about it. There is incredible value in using a browser with no alterior motivations, no additional products to sell you, no reason to spy on you.
Sure. But they'd make similar amounts of money (possibly more) by selling non-counterfeit goods.
They want their market to be open to third parties, because otherwise those third parties are gonna launch competing platforms. Better if they stick with Amazon, and Amazon gets a cut of the sale. There are thousands and thousands of Chinese companies selling products on Amazon, and many of them are fantastic deals. If Amazon blocks them, they all move to AliExpress, and maybe that really takes off and bites into Amazon's market share.
But when you consider the sheer number of products offered on Amazon, it's hard for them to separate the good-but-cheap from the crap counterfeit bullshit. And as you say...they make money either way, so it's not the highest-priority problem to fix--though as I said in another comment, they are aware that if enough products are crap, people will lose faith in Amazon as a whole, so they've tried different techniques to block bullshit reviews in the past.
But if somebody else wants to put in the work to filter shitty knockoffs from the results page? Well, that's fine with them! They make money selling you the real deal products, too--likely more, because their cut of a more expensive original product is gonna be higher.
A product with 2002 reviews suddenly has only 2 reviews, and they are not the nicest ones... Whole Amazon with 2002 gazillion reviews suddenly has only 2 gazillion... :-)
Seriously:
I guess they own several of these "companies" where you can buy fake reviews for your product. And now these are facing their revenues sinking.
Do you have any evidence of that? I used to work for Amazon (as a programmer working on financial data, not delivering packages or anything), and they took review quality pretty damn seriously. They knew full well that customers losing faith in the quality of products on Amazon, it could crater their business.
If some product with 2002 reviews suddenly drops to 2 reviews, 1.5 stars average...it'll sink to the bottom of pages of results, and people will click on a different one, with better reviews. It's not like they only have a couple products to offer, and they make money on more or less all of them.
Tried Sidebery too with some basic hidden UI CSS but having to keep it up to date makes it clunky at times, leagues away from Edges implementation where it's just a toggle away.
I don't see why. Fake reviews don't benefit Amazon. The review information is a value-add for them, and fake reviews detract from that.
Hell, if it actually is able to reliably detect fake reviews on Amazon -- which I doubt, but let's roll with it -- Amazon might buy the company that does the fake review detection to get it so that they can filter it.
I don't agree with the assertion that fake reviews don't benefit them, but I may be missing something. Reviews help drive consumer behavior and more reviews lead to more sales from those who are unable or unwilling to be more discerning. (Amazon takes a cut)
For others, it the idea or presence of fake reviews might drive them to a "trusted" Amazon Basics alternative, also leading to sales with a higher margin for Amazon.
Additionally, recycling listing ASINs is a common tactic that Amazon could stop and is a source of "fake" (or at least, irrelevant in content and misleading in score) reviews. There's minimal enforcement of rules for review integrity, such as verified purchases or quid pro quo "warranties" and "free gifts" for 5 star reviews.
All the evidence I see points to Amazon preferring the status quo.
I tried posting a negative review that mentioned a quid pro quo (offered a gift card in exchange for a 5 star review) and Amazon removed it for not being relevant to the product. So baseless 5 star reviews are allowed but not 1 star reviews.
"Brushing" scams seem way too common and easily executed through Amazon in order for them to not be turning a blind eye about it, imo. My mom was sent random LED lights for months through their return program despite never ordering them or hardly using amazon at all before she figured out what was happening. It feels like at least 5% of all my purchases come with a policy breaking email from the seller contacting me asking me for a five-star review in exchange for a free gift. Or even just contacting me 6 months later from a totally unrelated purchase and offering me a gift for no reason in exchange for a five-star review. Oh, they'll sure reimburse the money it costs to buy it! Because they really just want that five-star review! And Amazon seems to be happy allowing five-star reviews for products that are given away for free and even has a tag to let other users know, but just this method is frowned upon? I doubt it.
Yeah. Fakespot is no better at all. The best thing to do right now is know if a product has only been listed for less than a couple months and has hundreds of reviews, it's BS.
Next up; go to the review section, sort by newest, and read those reviews. Usually the fake reviews are flooded in early and you get more real ones in later. I've seen things rated at like 4.5 stars with 500 reviews, but then half of the 10 most recent reviews will rate it 1 star.
I have a Firefox extension from this website, and another one... So I've had this all along. I guess it's great to hear they are building something into the product itself, though.
I must admit that I do like the built in page translation, which I guess was made by a similar team using ML and all. Maybe I will like this too? Feels a bit... niche. Maybe it's a stepping stone to any misinformation at some point?
Edit This actually might not be coming as a browser feature at all. Mozilla is trying to increase the size of their Mozilla.ai team, so perhaps it's really looking for people with AI knowledge with web tech and a track record of using it for a ethical purpose. This team would be well placed to build pretty much any AI based tool for the firefox ecosystem.
I'm curious to see what Mozilla will do with the shopping assistant portion. Lots of browser extensions, and potentially even some of the Mozilla sponsors offer these types of features, and if Mozilla just stamps them out all at once by integrating that feature, it might lose them some financial support.
On the other hand, I do hope they don't start amassing huge amounts of training data from their uses. It would be a real bummer to not have a decent browser option anymore.
I've already been using the fakespot extension for a few years, and honestly, it feels pretty useless. I've seen it give A and B scores for products that I know have fake reviews. And on Amazon or Walmart and similar sites, we already know that the reviews are bullshit, so what difference does it really make for it to tell me that? It's not like I have any better option in most cases.
Eh, Fakespot has been decent enough for me. I think it works best when there are a lot of reviews, it's not very helpful when it's like 5-10 reviews on a product.
Does anyone know the split of Amazon's mobile app versus mobile web and desktop use? This won't have an impact on their proprietary app and that's a shame.
The question you're responding to isn't about the mobile app for Firefox; it's about the mobile app for Amazon. Apparently lots of other people misread that too, so at least you're in good company.
No... 2 to 4 star reviews are more realistic. 5 star reviews are either fake or they got lucky and nothing bad happened. 1 star reviews usually are from people that were PISSED OFF while 2 to 4 star reviews are generally from people with more nuanced opinions than "this product cured my cancer" or "this product set fire to my cat and stole my significant other"
I've been using fakespot for a few months now and it seems hit or miss a lot of times. I'm hoping that Mozilla has been making changes to improve the implementation of how it checks reviews.
I’m confused. Teachers/professors have said that using AI to detect papers written by AI is highly unreliable. How can this work effectively with a much smaller sample of text to work with (even when it looks for “similarities” between multiple reviews)? What happens in a week when Amazon starts writing fake reviews in different tones/“voices”/styles that are intentionally difficult or impossible to compare?
It's more than just bots, a lot are copy pasted 5 star reviews on shitty products. Or take for instance when sellers are allowed to completely change the listing but still have old reviews from a totally different product. Hopefully this is what they will filter out.
Fakespot used to reveal more about how they detected fakes, but as you say there are obvious issues with that, as it's a bit of an arms race. They don't just look at the text of the individual review though. Folks who buy reviews tend to get them from "review farms" that do reviews for a lot of products, and they don't have an infinite number of Amazon accounts to use for that, so there are network effects that can be powerful indicators, and that aren't easy for manipulate.
This is nothing to get excited about. Like so many other things there will be constant innovations on both sides. It's an arms race between the scammers and the scam detectors.
I'm literally the only person I know that does reviews on amazon.
That's including a circle of a dozen plus relatives I'm friendly enough with to make small talk, three good friends, my wife, my disability/chronic pain support group, the volunteer group I take part in, and a handful of online friends.
Like, you'd think one other person would get bored in the middle of the night and do reviews of stuff that they buy.
But there's always a shit ton of ai generated or copy/paste dreck you have to wade through to get to real people, and even then they may be shills or have been paid to change a review (no shit, I've been offered double and triple the original cost to change bad reviews).
I'd do it if you could leave fully anonymous reviews. But I'm not about to review products with my real name attached to them, even if it's just first name.
I know two, plus one other who only reviews when it is very bad. Just always look at middle and low end reviews, and be very extremely choosy about sellers, and roll the dice.
We literally just want passkeys and native PWA's (add-ons do not count), and an interface optimized for Android tablets. And I refuse to use Firefox again until these things are added.
This is incredibly out of scope for a browser feature set.
I mean I don't particularly like firefox either (although it's still probably the browser I dislike the least), but firefox needs users to keep google from having complete control over the web.
but firefox needs users to keep google from having complete control over the web.
Okay, but then what does that make Apple with Safari powered by WebKit (and it's mandated use on iOS)? In addition to the few and between browsers that make use of it like GNOME Web.
It was a fork off the Netscape Navigator which included a news reader, an email client, a browser and a kitchen sink, from what I remember. They took the browser part out and created Firefox, but it was called something else at first. Firebird maybe? Can't recall.
Maybe they mean lean compared to internet explorer toolbars? But yeah, it's never been minimal. And I doubt this would really add that much bloat memory-wise while running.
Mozilla Application Suite contained an email client and a HTML editor, among other things. Firefox was supposed to "just a browser", so to speak:
Firefox was created in 2002 under the code name "Phoenix" by members of the Mozilla community who desired a standalone browser rather than the Mozilla Application Suite bundle.
I would switch to Firefox the instant they let me group my tabs. This fragile stability I get with my browser is embarrassingly important to managing my ADHD.
Yea, this is what I use and it’s the best FF alternative. Not perfect, for me, cuz I have too many steps to switch from one group to the next. At least when compared to Chrome’s native grouping all in one window.
I think aliexpress is pretty good with reviews. I don't see obvious fakes, and a lot of people leave pictures, which is the only things that really matter.
Is it ? I regularily shop on aliexpress and I never saw dupplicate images from different reviewer. And generally most products have little review that all seems really legitimate.
Maybe it depend what you are shopping for ? But I would expect everyone from lemmy to buy tech like me.
I know that the results we get from the us are very different from in europe, maybe this has something to do with it ?
For me Amazon is by far the worst, 50 000 all fake reviews talking about another product
Sifting through reviews to find real criticism is tedious. I never asked for this feature expecting it to become a reality, but I won’t turn my nose at time saved at 0 expense. As long as it isn’t used for marketing or fingerprinting, what’s the issue? Note: I might be missing your sarcasm, I’m tired.
Then you can ignore/turn it off? It's also a function to protect users from malicious online behavior, dunno how that could be interpreted as a nanny, unless you also insist browsers shouldn't warn you when accessing known malware links or similar. If you really insist on having the absolute freedom to not be advised about it when you're being scammed then go off I guess.
ugh, stop adding bloat to my browser. I don't want your shitty shopping assistant Mozilla as much as I don't want it in Edge or Chrome. Once extension support in Epiphany is good enough for KeePassXC I'm switching away from Firefox entirely...