fastcompany.com
www.fastcompany.com

Mozilla’s system only measures the success rate of ads—it doesn’t help companies target those ads—and it’s less susceptible to abuse, EFF’s Lena Cohen told @FastCompany@flipboard.com. “It’s much more privacy-preserving than Google’s version of the same feature.”

https://mastodon.social/@eff/112922761259324925

Privacy experts say the new toggle is mostly harmless, but Firefox users saw it as a betrayal.

“They made this technology for advertisers, specifically,” says Jonah Aragon, founder of the Privacy Guides website. “There’s no direct benefit to the user in creating this. It’s software that only serves a party other than the user.”

  • LWD@lemm.ee
    2·
    4 months ago

    Could you name one or two things that are part of “all the advertisement telemetry” that is new?

    If your argument is that nothing new is being collected, then there is no reason for Mozilla Corp to collect it and you agree with me that they should roll these changes back.

    Also, why do you need a guaranteed privacy increase?

    Because I hate it when corporations like Google and Mozilla lie by calling something private when it endangers privacy rather than enhancing it.

    Here’s a question for you: in what universe do corporations somehow implement Mozilla’s proprietary technology and actually increase privacy?

    • Vincent@feddit.nl
      1·
      4 months ago

      If your argument is that nothing new is being collected, then there is no reason for Mozilla Corp to collect it and you agree with me that they should roll these changes back.

      I’ll also argue that no new data is being collected for vertical tabs, but I don’t see why that should mean that vertical tabs should be rolled back.

      Here’s a question for you: in what universe do corporations somehow implement Mozilla’s proprietary technology and actually increase privacy?

      Hopefully in this universe, a couple of years down the road, when legislators have become confident that they can legislate away the most invasive practices without putting lots of potential voters out of a job.

      • LWD@lemm.ee
        2·
        4 months ago

        If you believe PPA isn’t collecting new data, then you haven’t pointed to it doing anything else. You make it out to be worthless, and I’m trying to ascertain whether you believe this authentically.

        Vertical tabs serve a distinct UX and UI function and I could write paragraphs about it. And even if I couldn’t, others have. For years.

        Nobody has asked for Mozilla’s bullshit until it was pushed on them, but I’d be happy to hear out your post-hoc rationalization if you have actual things it is rather than your interesting claims about what it isn’t.

        • Vincent@feddit.nl
          1·
          3 months ago

          I’m saying it’s not collecting new personal data. It will be helping advertisers know how many of the clicks on a particular button were preceded by seeing a particular ad, but they won’t know a single thing about the people that did that.

          • LWD@lemm.ee
            2·
            3 months ago

            It’s just collecting the same data that people have already opted out of, and more often.

            You are also using a misleading statement, either maliciously or unknowingly, to make a false statement:

            • The misleading statement: “advertisers won’t know a thing about the people that clicked their ad”. While this may allegedly be correct, as Mozilla has claimed it, Mozilla has the capability and the private data (which they sell directly to advertising companies) to do this themselves.
            • The false statement: “Mozilla is not collecting new personal data.” You are using Mozilla’s statement to assume this is the case, but it is not. Mozilla is collecting the extra personal data directly. Anonymization is not done on your browser.

            Due to the fact that Mozilla has broken users trust by sneakily injecting this extra data collection, I don’t see any reason a rational person would presume Mozilla should be trusted on further statements regarding their sneaky activity. Do you?

            • Vincent@feddit.nl
              1·
              3 months ago

              Of course whoever make my browser had the capability to siphon it all off. But nothing in the PPA news has given me reason to believe that is happening: nobody has pointed out the source code that does it, or intercepted network requests in which they see it happening, or even just been able to name a single piece of personal data that is apparently being sold to advertising companies. You have not done so either.

              I also think that if Mozilla was trying to be sneaky, they could have done a better job than literally mentioning it in the release notes.

              • LWD@lemm.ee
                1·
                3 months ago

                So by your metric, Mozilla has been dishonest compared to even Google in the data sucking they’ve implemented, since even Google announced it, correct?

                Do you genuinely believe the average user reads the release notes? If you do, I call bullshit.

                • Vincent@feddit.nl
                  1·
                  3 months ago

                  The main difference between Mozilla and Google is that Google is actually sucking up your data. For example, I can specifically mention that they’ve got stored where you log in often, what age they think you are, what gender, how rich you likely are, etc. Even if they’re completely honest about it, that’s not good. You can’t make such a list about Mozilla, and Mozilla doesn’t actively try to hide what they are doing (non-invasive measurement of ad performance).

                  Of course, the average user doesn’t read the release notes. (I’d go even further: the average user doesn’t read anything.) But the only reason you know about PPA, is because Mozilla explicitly called it out in the release notes, after which some bloggers decided to make a stink.

                  You’ve accused Mozilla of two separate things:

                  1. Collecting personal data (but can’t say what data)
                  2. Being sneaky about it (but they could just as well not have mentioned it in the release notes and you wouldn’t have known)
                  • LWD@lemm.ee
                    1·
                    3 months ago

                    So you agree with #1 but are upset I have not provided specifics… FakeSpot and Anonym privacy policies are downright evil, the specifics are there.

                    For #2, you also agree with me, you just have a much lower ethical bar than I do for Mozilla. It’s always the Mozilla fans who act like it’s a terrible company…

                    Regarding the claim that Mozilla is good and Google is bad, that’s based on a presumption. Considering all the terrible behavior Mozilla has engaged in, I see no reason to continue presuming it. It would be as clueless as taking Google at its word with “do no evil.”