IMHO, this is a bad idea. Many people I know already use Firefox because they're weary to give Google (Chrome) all their data.
Firefox should make this feature opt-in only.
IMHO, this is a bad idea. Many people I know already use Firefox because they're weary to give Google (Chrome) all their data.
Firefox should make this feature opt-in only.
It's not just about the data, it's about the lack of consent. If you just ask people for permission on the initial startup, I'm sure most people will be fine with enabling it. Last time I installed Firefox, it just showed a tiny bar at the bottom of the window, which is pretty easy to miss. I'd expect fewer dark patterns from Mozilla, that's the kind of shady behavior you see coming from Microsoft. I always try my best to disable or block anything which phones home without explicitly asking for consent.
Tunnelblick [0] is a good example of this being done well. On the initial run they ask if you want to enable automatic updates. It includes the option to disable sending anonymous system information, as well as including a disclosure widget with a brief explanation and a table showing the information that would be sent. [1]
I agree, but note that they are explicitly trying to get more info than they can from the small, biased sample that is users opting in.
Just starting to collect your browsing data is a bad idea (tm) especially if your main claim is "more privacy".
Maybe because most people using Firefox use it precisely because they don't want the browser vendor to track their behaviour?
I wonder how the Torbrowser folks will deal with this.
They get good enough data from the people that have volunteered it. I don't know what makes them think it's biased but I seriously doubt that is true.
Informed, constructive opinion there.
One clear sign of the bias is that the crash rate of the browser goes up massively every time a new version transforms from beta to release. Clearly, it's not renaming that string that makes the browser crash. The populations are just fundamentally different.
To give an obvious example, beta users are overwhelmingly more like to have up to date video drivers. (Which can be seen in crash reports, but is also very logical).
These users will be installing Chrome, not Firefox.
And this move will also drive them away.
The switch barrier is non existent. Most of the replies in this thread are ideological. Nobody is arguing CSS rendering speed comparisons and such.
People use Firefox because they like it.
People are irrational but like is huge. Toyota over Hyundai. Vacations at the sea instead of skiing. Firefox over Chrome.
The like is a habit, but if all things are equal and free, a very flexible one.
Quite the opposite if the focus too much on the regular users they might get too much noise and never notice issues in the more complex features that only power users tend to use.
You want the heavy users of your product sending in reports not the average Joe because he is less likely to even notice a issue.
Higher level features are less likely to be covered by tests and more likely to break just because of their complexity however you wont have many average people using them.
Former Opera people can tell a few stories there.
[EDIT: Firefox branding used to use the word privacy a lot. I can't find it on their website much at all anymore.]
More privacy
Firefox doesn’t sell access to your personal information
like other companies. From privacy tools to tracking
protection, you’re in charge of who sees what.
Here’s how Firefox protects your privacy
So yes they still advertise with that as one of the major features.[1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/?utm_medium=referral&u...
For instance, from the same page 8 years ago: "we have experts around the globe working around the clock to keep you (and your personal information) safe."
https://web.archive.org/web/20090827204813/http://www.mozill...
Or this quote from the equivalent site 6 years ago:
"And, as a non-profit organization, protecting your privacy by keeping you in control over your personal information is a key part of our mission."
https://web.archive.org/web/20110902025003/http://www.mozill...
Most users do not care because they do not understand the true ramifications of their not caring. It is not like that looked at all the data, then made made an informed choice to share everything.
FF should be at the heart of caring for users privacy EVEN IF THEY THEMSELVES DO NOT.
The average person does not understand technology, how much data they are leaking about themselves and how this data can be used against their interests
Taking advantage of that ignorance for any type of gain is unethical IMO, most companies willfully exploit this collective ignorance Mozilla should be better than most companies.