Hacker News Reader

Comment by AnIdiotOnTheNet | Hacker News Reader

Thing is, Google doesn't try to sell itself otherwise. Mozilla talks a good game about privacy and users-first, but then it goes and does things like Pocket, Mr. Robot, etc. that make it clear it is all just marketing.

Edit: Uh, my memory was faulty on this one. See below.

View on HN

What was the actual, real problem with Pocket? Adding an easily-removed link to the UI didn't leak your private data or otherwise cause problems.

Mozilla replaced a feature that was end to end encrypted with one that sent private data to a third party for data mining.

They denied getting paid for the integration. That was technically true. They eventually admitted they got paid for referrals.

They bought the company in 2017 and promised to release the source code. They still haven't.

The Pocket website says "as a member of the Firefox family, privacy is paramount."[1] The first part is misleading and the second part is simply false.

[1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/pocket/

The whole Pocket affair reeked of “Valley connections” and corruption, and resulted in a net loss of privacy for Firefox users compared to what was there before. I use Firefox and will likely never stop using it, but that and FFOS, I felt, were signs that MoCo was being run like “just another company” rather than something that should have a strong moral and ethical compass.

> Personally I'm still upset about that time they fired a guy for having a fetish and then pretending they cared about inclusivity.

Citation?

Apparently my memory is faulty and I'm conflating separate events at different companies even. Withdrawn.

Surely the best way to handle problems with the town's only firefighter isn't leaping into the raging flames?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com