Hacker News Reader

Comment by beebeepka | Hacker News Reader

They aren't taking away control. Read their own post

If I install a ceiling fan for someone with multiple speeds, forward/reverse, and a dimmable light but I take the remote with me and leave just a basic on/off switch that's still taking away control.

Give me full control of all features or I go elsewhere.

If you install a fancy ceiling fan for someone and the remote is on backorder, and you're going to bring it to them next week, I don't think you've done them any major disservice.

That's what's happening here. A feature for which the UX is still in development, and until then, interested users can manage it via the about:config page.

They started disabling extensions installed by user on some websites without clear explanation why and when it will happen and intentionally hided settings to disable this functionality.

Should I read their own post again?

Why not ask user first? "Do you want to disable add-on not monitored by Mozilla on this specific site?".

Also, how many times users asks about this functionality? "I want Mozilla to monitor add-ons installed on my browser and disable it on some websites, when Mozilly want it" - surelly most of the users wants this.

Please do read it again. They've not disabled any extension on any website. They've added a option for that to potentially do that.

Sorry, but they really remotely can (and will) disable any "not approved" extension on any website that they want.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1832791

Upd:

> We need to have ability to set the list of quarantined domains remotely.

The disagreement was not over the capability but with your claim that it's already being used ("They started disabling extensions...").

Reply on news.ycombinator.com