Firefox Suggest (address bar based ads, currently limited to US)
support.mozilla.org
support.mozilla.org
Mozilla Corporation, please figure out a way for users to directly donate to support Firefox. Not everybody realizes or knows that the donations on mozilla.org go to Mozilla Foundation and not to Mozilla Corporation. Not everybody knows that Firefox is primarily funded by a search partnership agreement with Google. The direct donations to Firefox may not be a lot, but I’m sure it could pay for at least one programmer a month, if not more.
Mozilla Corporation, expand the availability of Mozilla VPN to all the countries that Mullvad offers its services in. Keeping it restricted isn’t helping anyone much.
Mozilla is sitting on around a billion dollars in assets and continues to have revenue around $400 million a year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Affiliatio...
https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2019/mozilla-fdn-201...
Mozilla has had weasely language regarding their advertising agreements since at least 2014 when they announced their "ongoing search strategy," saying that Yahoo was going to be their "long term strategic partner." They then breached their contract with Yahoo in 2017, presumably because Google offered them a deal they couldn't refuse to be reinstated as the default to coincide with the Firefox Quantum release.
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-feature...
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/promoting-choice-and-inn...
... it would seem that 14 more years of eating out of Google's hands(with ever growing sums) has softened their resolve.
"The things that make Mozilla and Firefox a success [are] the product, and the community that cares about it."
First and foremost, we would protect those things," Baker said. "If the protection of those things would come into conflict with Google, or any of our search partners, we would opt for the community who built Firefox and love Firefox."
... would that it were so.> while keeping your privacy in mind.
Doesn't mean it's maintained with reasonable assurance.
Who is even asking for these features? The majority of firefox users I know are very privacy conscious. Is a little address bar feature really going to attract more people to use firefox?
On the web, contextual ads is where everyone begins as they "don't want to be evil". But ad monetized business models can make more money only in two ways - more users or more ads per user.
Once you exhaust the first option for growth, the businesses inevitably pursue the second option because the web as a platform allows them to do that easily with additional tracking and data monetization, unlike with newspapers or radio.
That makes this a 'soft' stop and the temptation has been proven too hard to resist for many, analogue to putting a jar of cookies in front of a child and asking them not to touch it.
It would be much 'healthier' if a business model itself was not designed in a way that puts it potentially onto a trajectory to collide with user's privacy at some point in time.
Props to Mozilla for finding revenue diversification opportunities, but this still doesn't feel quite right since it's enabled by default.
I make basically all my income via Firefox indirectly.. if you want a slice just ask for it, don't be creepy
For an annual license, perhaps a sheet of stickers?
Don't nerf regular Firefox
Firefox starts with 200M users now and if 3% get Pro that is 6M users paying $5/month (?) for $30M/month and $360M/year in revenue. That is almost exactly that same as what Firefox makes from Google. The added benefit is that this change could transition it into a user-centric mindset.
Do you agree with the math?
They lost a big chunk of valuable (but not financially) user trust. It's really tricky to regain it, they would have to take a leap of faith, do "the right thing", and hope users will believe.
Or maybe we need to fork it and crowdfund (crowdhire?) firefox developers. And hope they will accept the risk of financial difficulties down the line. And there will be a long term trust/authority problem to solve - who makes decisions? But I would trust their devs personally, I think
Regarding the fork part I'm not sure who we is but I'm not interested in making a web browser
Well, I think this is a huge misstep if that’s really your mission statement, Mozilla. Selling “my” eyeballs to ad vendors is not giving me control of my online experience.
It’s, frankly, behavior we expect from Google. From Apple. Facebook. Is this the company you wish to keep?
At this point a better risk avoidance strategy would have been focus on Firefox development and retaining user share (particularly on Mobile where they basically faded to nothing while holding onto the old browser engine on Android for far too long) to have decades worth of current income on hand from the same deal they've kept anyways.
With containers, and tree style tabs/sideberry it gives a unique user experience. To me it is performant enough and has great adblocking through ublock origin (that is not in danger of removal by API changes, looking at you every single chromium fork).
Starting from scratch doesn't have a chance at this point. The web is too complex for a volunteer team to build a brand new browser. So the only option is a fork of Firefox, but most of the people who have the time, energy, and ability to work on fully understanding the Firefox code base probably work for Mozilla.
Seems like a recipe for bad publicity when ever there is an issue with a specific version.
Also you'd name minor and major versions, not patch versions.
But it is very very annoying.
pretty obnoxious in dark mode
edit: you can get rid of this in about:config by clearing the value of browser.privatebrowsing.vpnpromourl
The pitch is clear: "Users are our only customers. We'll always do what's best for you and we'll do it completely transparently."
If Mozilla wants to offer a “We won’t screw with you, like by creating new places for ads and burying the settings (like we have and will with free users)” premium plan, I’d consider it. I’d prefer to pay a company that doesn’t do that at all, though (that is, it’s built around innovating for paying customers), even if they aren’t able to offer a free browser.
Obviously being a paying customer doesn’t guarantee customer-first decisions or transparency, but as we saw this week, not being one makes it almost impossible.
And it's my longheld belief that most people should use native browsers, as they have natural technical advantages on a platform. Now I'm in alignment on my own hardware. I use Safari on iOS and Edge on Windows. I do keep Edge installed on iOS for the send to device functionality, which doesn't work too well right now. More evidence that Edge seems to be a WIP but it's definitely got a bright future.
Including of course the standard of having search suggestions on and sent to a privacy unfriendly vendor.
It's an amazing browser, probably just the best one atm if you don't care about privacy, but for privacy it's far from ideal.
My main reason for using it anyway is that I'm neck deep in Google's world, who I'm most worried about, and view perfect privacy as unattainable so I try to view most things as a larger effect overtaking a smaller effect. I need to get off my Google Account first, which applies to Maps, Youtube, Gmail and search. I use all of those. I view Google as having the most intimate view of who I am given they know where I go, watch, type, and look for. I'm making efforts. I'm moving to another email provider once I sort out how to transfer all my emails over. That'll go a long ways. That doesn't excuse privacy intrusions anywhere else, but Google is definitely my biggest issue. And the least trustworthy of all actors that I do business with.
For the browser itself, I balance privacy with other factors. I want a browser from a large vendor, capable of proper support over the longterm. Microsoft fits the bill there. Being my native browser doesn't hurt at all, it was Mozilla's development articles that opened my eyes to all the advantage that native browsers have over 3rd party. I also want performance if Firefox doesn't suit my uses any longer, the move to Chromium solved that. I agree with your assessment, I think it may be the best browser out now, discounting privacy.
I do keep Tor installed for any sensitive searches, which I do none of, but I keep it on my machine and phone (Onion Browser on iOS) just to remind me of how insecure most browsing is. Tor would be a good idea even for Firefox users. I do agree with the idea that the best privacy by default is a good idea, it's just not enough of a concern to overrule where Firefox and Edge are respectively today.
And lastly, I think there's room for improvement for everyone. I hope Edge continues to get better on the privacy front. I don't think any of them are cemented in their position, especially Edge as it feels unfinished in many ways on basic levels still.
100% - NO
I will miss your little furry logo henceforth.
What should we do about it?
The advertising industry, which generally means the corporate owned, mass surveillance apparatus that is every authoritarians wet dream is malicious.
I have a fundamental right to see not see the content I do not want to see. I have a fundamental right to not be advertised to. Firefox has violated this right.
Firefox is a non-profit, but it needs revenue to provide that browser to users. Right now most of that revenue comes from Google (and its search suggestions, also enabled by default, I think). I'm not sure how you expect it to do its job for free, and it seems to get nothing but pushback whenever it tries to become more independent. I do not agree with all of Firefox's decisions, but to say they have "utterly failed" feels overstated.
Every decision they have made in recent memory has been in the pursuit of getting rid of user customization. Something which Firefox was originally built on. This is the reason they are hemorrhaging users.
And that's not even touching on the entire surveillance infrastructure that has been constructed in the name of advertising, which we can similarly classify as malicious.
Fork it.
But I'm not sure I agree this is malicious. Perhaps annoying and even poorly thought out, but malicious implies they are actively trying to undermine the project, rather than trying to find ways to break the project's dependence on Google but missing the mark.
I wish they'd stop wasting money on dumb projects like a VPN and instead just focus on making a fast, modern browser that respects my privacy and doesn't fucking show me ads.
I think VPN would be/hopefully will be a great escape rope for Firefox, as it fits well with their privacy orientedness, and does pay somewhat for the development costs.
They're trying to tackle the revenue issue on multiple fronts, including Mozilla VPN, a subscription "privacy pack" (that includes Mozilla VPN and upgraded versions of Firefox Relay and Firefox Monitor) and this.
Mozilla doesn't want the future of their entire organization to rest in the hands of Google, whose decisions they don't have control over (and who is also their main competitor).
and not something like their mobile OS or their social missions (like 3D VR chat and other assorted crap)
Now, I don't particularly enjoy the idea of being tracked, but I don't really have activity that I wouldn't want a stranger (or a close friend, for that matter) to know about, anyway, and that's intentional.