AI Summary:

Overview:

  • Mozilla is updating its new Terms of Use for Firefox due to criticism over unclear language about user data.
  • Original terms seemed to give Mozilla broad ownership of user data, causing concern.
  • Updated terms emphasize limited scope of data interaction, stating Mozilla only needs rights necessary to operate Firefox.
  • Mozilla acknowledges confusion and aims to clarify their intent to make Firefox work without owning user content.
  • Company explains they don’t make blanket claims of “never selling data” due to evolving legal definitions and obligations.
  • Mozilla collects and shares some data with partners to keep Firefox commercially viable, but ensures data is anonymized or shared in aggregate.
  • Dave@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 minutes ago

    Mozilla collects and shares some data with partners to keep Firefox commercially viable

    How hard is it to be specific? People are concerned about this, can they not tell us the exact data they share and with whom, or is doing so going to make people more concerned so they are avoiding telling us?

  • based_raven@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 hours ago

    What’s the alternative for Android? Fuck Chrome I want to move off this shit onto something that actually gives half a shit about me.

  • doctortofu@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    229
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    That’s good and I’m genuinely glad they’re trying to clarify it, but it proves yet again that their top management is out of touch with reality and their users: somebody (most likely more than one person actually) had to sign off on these changes and the message they sent out - this whole thing could have been avoided if they understood their users better (and/or if they actually cared nore about what users think).

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Google funding allows them to be big and inefficient, which means a lot of tops paid well and thinking themselves fashionable FOSS leader people or something.

      They can live without it. They’ll have to cut most of the organization and return to being an open project developing a web browser.

      That doesn’t sound cool for people not doing useful work. Like me, I’ll get to my shit instead of typing comments.

  • psyspoop@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    Mozilla says that “there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners” so that Firefox can be “commercially viable,” but it adds that it spells those out in its privacy notice and works to strip data of potentially identifying information or share it in aggregate.

    Sounds like they’ve already been selling (or trading) data and this whole debacle is a way to retroactively cover their asses.

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Yeah. And their privacy notice is basically a mix-match of ten or so sections that have no place in a web browser privacy policy, that allows them to do the things people reproach them for doing.

      It’s like saying “we’re not doing that, because we’re limited by that document that allows us to do just that”. And now they’re tripling down on it.

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    They have no business collecting any data in the first place. If I wanted my data collected I’d be using Chrome like everyone else. I’m not choosing to use their buggy ass inferior and slower browser for any of Mozilla’s services, I’m choosing it because I want to support non-Chromium browsers and regain my privacy.

    There’s no point whatsoever to using Firefox if it’s just a worse Chrome.

    • imecth@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Telemetry benefits everyone, knowing which features are getting used, knowing what parts are causing crashes… It lets developers target what to improve and fix instead of going in blind. I get that collecting data can be scary, because so far everyone has been busy selling that data. But there’s a reason why data is so valuable, if it’s properly handled and anonymized it benefits everyone using firefox.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It lets developers target what to improve and fix instead of going in blind.

        I’m sure they’ll make do

      • gamer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I think it’d be less creepy if there was an easily accessible public dashboard displaying this telemetry. E.g. like counters showing how many people hide the bookmark bar. If you can instantly see what data your browser is sending in an easily digestible format (ie not a dump of JSON in a submenu), it’s easier to gain a quick understanding of the benefits vs minimal privacy tradeoffs.

        But it really depends on trust: trust that they’re not collecting more than they claim, and trust that the data is properly anonymized. Mozilla has lost that trust.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        No, fuck that and quit bootlicking. Software makers did just fine without telemetry for decades; your supposed justification is nothing but a bullshit lazy excuse.

        • imecth@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Software makers did just fine without telemetry for decades

          They actually did not, almost every software out there is mining your information. Software developers rely on and need data, you can’t guess what people want. Whether it’s from studies, testers, surveys, or telemetry, developers need information about what users like, what they don’t, how they interact with the software… This is what makes data so valuable, and why businesses like Google can exist. Denying open source software telemetry is shooting yourself in the foot.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            . Software developers rely on and need data, you can’t guess what people want.

            Why would I want software developers (particularly web browser) to guess what I want? I will tell them what I want, otherwise they have no business serving it to me.

            If I’m not offering that data, it means I don’t want you to have it. Simple as that.

            • imecth@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              13 hours ago

              I will tell them what I want

              You might, but 99% of users will never take a step towards giving any feedback whatsoever.

              • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                13 hours ago

                Yes, which means they don’t want anything from them. Rather than seeing those people as nothing more than potential profit, just move on.

                • imecth@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  Yes, which means they don’t want anything from them.

                  And yet they’re using the application. Don’t you want the applications that you use to work better? This is what telemetry enables, the ability to give feedback without jumping through 10 hoops, creating an account, responding to a survey, or whatever other method you’re thinking of to give feedback.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        20 hours ago

        if it’s properly handled and anonymized it benefits everyone using firefox

        glub glub much?

        There is no justification for opt-out telemetry data collection, and there is no proper handling of data obtained despite user pushback. Also, properly anonymizing large data sets is not as trivial as you think. Even “fully anonymized” data set, assuming everything’s possible’s been done, can lead to correlation when added with other data. Even “cohorts” can lead to the creation of an aggregate group with so few individuals that it basically boils down to individual tracking.

        Why do you think people are so vocal about not letting any of this happens in the first time? It’s not for blind idealism. It’s basically because even a minimum waiver on “supposedly anonymous” data is a huge blow to your privacy. And some people care about that.

        Besides, Mozilla’s been pushing for a shitton of features that are constantly blamed for Firefox becoming as bad as its competition, and constantly turned off/removed. If they cared even a tiny bit about user feedback, the last… 3, 5 years of decisions from Mozilla would have been very different. Feature usage telemetry is a joke to make people accept their bullshit; the only thing that influence feature development is management or very heavy pushback, and that happens in dev issues, not with telemetry feedback.

        • imecth@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          20 hours ago

          glub glub much?

          That’s a nice way to start and end a discussion.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          While they have to be careful, there can be reasonable ones to help what they do/stop doing.

          Example, “x% of telemetry enabled users enable the bookmark bar”, not particularly useful for harmful purposes, but if it were 0.00%, then they know efforts accommodating the bookmark bar would be pointless. Not many users would go out of their way to say “I don’t use some feature I’m ignoring”, and telemetry is able to convey that data, so the developer is not guessing based on his preference.

          That being said, the telemetry is so opaque that it’s hard to make an informed decision as to whether the telemetry in question is risky or not. Might be good to have some sort of accumulated telemetry data that you can click to review and submit, and have that data be actually human readable and to the point for salient points.

  • shoulderoforion@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    cool, sounds good. (the Community gif where Troy walks into the room with Pizza, Pierce has been shot, and there’s fire everywhere)

  • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m eagerly awaiting the new version but I already like it. They now admit that they are sharing and sometimes selling private data (anonymized or not, same thing).

  • Jocker@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    1 day ago

    Mozilla is soo stupid!

    Most Firefox users use it only because of the values it upholds, and now they decided to destroy it. MF wouldn’t even have any any revenue once they betray their little existing users!

    If they’re throwing away their values, then there is no reason to use Firefox anymore, BECAUSE OBJECTIVELY FIREFOX IS INFERIOR TO CHROMIUM.

    And hopefully this accelerates development and support to fully alternate browsers.

            • Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              18 hours ago

              OK I think I see what you’re saying now:

              If everyone leaves Firefox because of this, Google would probably stop paying them to be the default search engine.

              I don’t see that as the biggest issue though. Once people are leaving, my guess is they’re just going to stop maintaining firefox regardless of how much money they get from Google. Cause why maintain a browser literally no one uses, instead of figuratively.

    • verdigris@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You’re not totally wrong here, but the fact is that these updates are a complete non-issue that has only resulted in so much backlash because of the self-selected Firefox audience of people who know enough about tech and privacy to care, but not enough to understand what’s actually threatening. The updates were a minor change in language that didn’t change the status quo, but idiots like the guy who thinks that incognito mode somehow stops a site from gathering information on you flock to these articles and start crying doomsday.

      Mozilla is the only big web company that’s even close to on the side of consumers and it’s sad to see them eat shit for no reason.

  • Lit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Is there a way to generate fake user activity data to feed to Firefox or stripped down versions of firefox ?
    So that the data is useless for anyone buying it. Furthermore fake browsing data also messes up data collection by websites.

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’re probably just better going with a fork of FF that has all that nonsense stripped out.

    • Ledericas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      maybe with anti-detection browser, there are with free-bee version, dont know if that will help . which basically lets you use proxies as well, and spoofs your fingerprinting. people who made of accts, or advertise on reddit uses these to evade reddit ban(until reddit made it harder to do so currently)

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      68
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      “I am doing things that are not selling your data which some people consider to be selling your data”

      Why is he so cryptic? Neil, why don’t you tell me what those things are and let me be the judge?

      • PixelPinecone@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I’m pretty sure this person is making a joke using a fake exaggerated “answer” from a corporation to highlight the absurdity of their double speak. I doubt something this insane would come from an actual spokesperson.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I’m getting that now too. I don’t know the players in Mozilla. The quote without context made me think this was one of those Mozilla execs.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        66
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Louis Rossmann had a good video about this. Basically, California passed a law that changed what “selling your data” means, and it goes way beyond what I consider “selling your data.” There’s an argument here than Mozilla is largely just trying to comply with the law. Whether that’s accurate remains to be seen though.

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Some jurisdictions classify “sale” as broadly as “transfer of data to any other company, for a ‘benefit’ of any kind” Benefit could even be non-monetary in terms of money being transferred for the data, it could be something as broadly as “the browser generally improving using that data and thus being more likely to generate revenue.”

        To avoid frivolous lawsuits, Mozilla had to update their terms to clarify this in order to keep up with newer laws.

        • mle@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          24 hours ago

          I think this is a reasonable explanation.

          But I also believe a large part of the firefox user base does not want any data about them collected by their browser, no matter if it is for commercial purposes or simply analytics / telemetry. Which is why the original statement “we will never sell any of your data” was just good enough for them, and anything mozilla is now saying is basically not good enough, no matter how much they clarify it to mean “not selling in the colloquial sense”

          • verdigris@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Which is a ridiculous thing to want for most users and exposes how little so much of the self-identified “techie” crowd actually understands about how this stuff works.

        • Obinice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I agree, I don’t want my browser provider to collect any data on me at all, but if they absolutely must gather the absolute minimum system analytics stats or such they should NEVER pass it to a third party for ANY reason.

          You make a desktop browser application, that’s your job, to provide a portal to the world wide web, nothing more. Stay within your bounds and we’ll never have any problem.

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I mean…if they pay for the service of external analization of data in exchange of money, how is that a sale of goods/data?

          • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Ask the lawmakers who wrote the laws with vague language, because according to them, that kind of activity could be considered a sale.

            As a more specific example that is more one-sided, but still not technically a “sale,” Mozilla has sponsored links on the New Tab page. (they can be disabled of course)

            These links are provided by a third-party, relatively privacy protecting ad marketplace. Your browser downloads a list of links from them if you have sponsored links turned on, and no data is actually sent to their service about you. If you click a sponsored link, a request is sent using a protocol that anonymizes your identity, that tells them the link was clicked. That’s it, no other data about your identity, browser, etc.

            This generates revenue for Mozilla that isn’t reliant on Google’s subsidies, that doesn’t actually sell user data. Under these laws, that would be classified as a sale of user data, since Mozilla technically transferred data from your device (that you clicked the sponsored link) for a benefit. (financial compensation)

            However, I doubt anyone would call that feature “selling user data.” But, because the law could do so, they have to clarify that in their terms, otherwise someone could sue them saying “you sold my data” when all they did was send a small packet to a server saying that some user, somewhere clicked the sponsored link.

            • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              I would definitely call that selling my data. The recipient can now add that to my profile as an interest.

      • hansolo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        18 hours ago

        “ChatGPT, I need your help. Please pretend to be a lawyer that recently suffered a severe concussion and write me something I can post online that will male this situation slightly weirder.”

        • dnzm@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Neil doesn’t need a chatbot with sparkles for that, he’s plenty capable to take absolute piss himself. 😁

        • zonnewin@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Oh, it’s perfectly clear. We got the message. Mozilla are not to be trusted with our data.

          • Ledericas@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            vague to be exact, keeping it vague, so its up for interpretation on thier part, and they can use the vagueness as an excuse.

          • xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            all sorts of people are super satisfied with answers that don’t answer the question….
            people tell me that all the time….