When it comes to privacy, default settings matter (2019)
blog.mozilla.org
blog.mozilla.org
https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/the-danger...
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/10/why-getting-paid-your-...
As far as solutions, these are probably going to be more regulatory than technological in nature:
https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/what-gdpr-means-for-facebo...
But in general, Android is probably the OS I trust most. It has close to embedded-level reliability with almost consumer desktop level features.
Other platforms have to make a lot of compromises to achieve high availability, and are very simple, manual-first things like a very lightweight Linux.
The only real problem I have with the UI is the lack of an Undo, the fact that no browser lets you disable pull to refresh, and the few times I have found Bluetooth mysteriously turn itself off.
There's never any real confusion. I never have to read a manual or wonder where something is. It's perfect for a mobile platform, because you can do whatever you need to do right then and there, even if you haven't prepared for it or done it before.
I remember reading, that this is not the only place in LOS, that google servers are used, but I never looked into it.
1: https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/guide-how-to-avoid-the-ca...
Good thing librewolf/iceraven exist.
Iceraven helps a bit, but there's virtually no incentive for someone to develop an extension for Fenix now. The pool of potential users would be small enough for Firefox itself, but its vastly smaller for Iceraven. I've been using Kiwi most of the time as it can use just about every extension available for desktop Chromium.
Now, only recommended extensions, of which there are 18, can be installed on the release version. The nightly build makes it possible to install more extensions from the official site after jumping through a bunch of hoops[0]. Loading extensions from other sources is limited to a debug/development process that isn't viable for daily use[1].
Attempts by users and extension developers to communicate with the project about this issue have been deferred and stonewalled for the past couple years.
[0] https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio...
[1] https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/develop/developi...
At best we're left to assume that they're so disorganized that Mozilla has put out this article calling out a toxic practice they themselves are happy to continue participating in.
At worst we could look at this as Mozilla violating their user's privacy while also knowing that it's wrong and trying to trick Firefox users into thinking that Mozilla is looking out for the them and that Firefox wouldn't do the harmful things it's actually doing.
I very much wish Mozilla would either stand by the message in this article and disable the harmful defaults in their own browser or stop pretending to hold values they refuse to respect themselves.
In the end, the change being discussed in this article/advertisement is still a good thing for user's privacy and I get why they'd want to promote it as a feature of their browser often missing from others, but they could do that without the dishonest/contradictory messaging.
Safari :)
What? Can't I make an extension and install it in my own browser? Or do you mean that it's not possible with default settings?
Also when most if not all telemetry from mozilla firefox is opt out.
Including stuff like phoning home by default when you search, bookmarking something, delete anything from your history[1] and having a unique download token to track each install.[2]
[1] https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/firefox.html [2] https://www.ghacks.net/2022/03/17/each-firefox-download-has-...
that was the straw that broke the camel's back for me
at this point, I'd prefer chromium singularity to this circus. there's no difference. at least that would be one less browser to support
Of course, many have postulated that Google's motivation to pay Mozilla all that money is actually to ensure that Mozilla remains in business, rather than to directly increase Google's own revenue with the added search traffic. By keeping Mozilla in business, Google can more convincingly argue that they do not have a monopoly on browsers. It may be the case that without this argument, Chrome could be subject to regulations that could benefit consumer privacy, but after watching all the recent congressional hearings involving big tech companies, I have very little faith in that happening any time soon. It's better to keep Mozilla around for now, and the only way to do that without turning Mozilla into another Google is for Google to essentially subsidize them.
When it comes to privacy, default settings matter - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20095856 - June 2019 (127 comments)
It really is unfortunate that the most popular browser is made by the same company that controls the most popular search engine, the most popular video sharing service, the most popular email provider, and the most popular cloud storage/collaboration service. This should not be legal.
I wish there was a platform that combined the app containment prowess of Apple platforms with the spam containment prowess of Google platforms.
Successors to Xposed and Xprivacy exist, but I have not used them. It may be time to revisit that.
[0] Many people, including me are still not satisfied with Android's permissions.