Hot off the back of its recent leadership rejig, Mozilla has announced users of Firefox will soon be subject to a ‘Terms of Use’ policy — a first for the iconic open source web browser.
This official Terms of Use will, Mozilla argues, offer users ‘more transparency’ over their ‘rights and permissions’ as they use Firefox to browse the information superhighway — as well well as Mozilla’s “rights” to help them do it, as this excerpt makes clear:
You give Mozilla all rights necessary to operate Firefox, including processing data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice, as well as acting on your behalf to help you navigate the internet.
When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox.
Also about to go into effect is an updated privacy notice (aka privacy policy). This adds a crop of cushy caveats to cover the company’s planned AI chatbot integrations, cloud-based service features, and more ads and sponsored content on Firefox New Tab page.
I feel like everything is getting corroded, the capitalists are wearing down everything
I moved on to Waterfox, is this a good move?
Get ready for ads as well
They removed this:
{ "@type": "Question", "name": "Does Firefox sell your personal data?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That’s a promise. " } },Turns out when you gotta choose between going defunct and selling ad space, selling ad space wins.
Also turns out that drying up donations for privacy protecting browsers means there is less demand for it, and less money to fund it.
The majority cost of Firefox is engineering salaries.
Eventually something has to give, and this is it.
Also turns out that drying up donations for privacy protecting browsers means there is less demand for it
Or, hear me out, that former donors don’t trust them anymore!
But also that a lot of people don’t want to donate, basically when they could only donate an immeasurably small amount, to a company whose CEO gets an unimaginably huge pay, that could be used for significantly boosting development.
Personally that’s a big reason I rather want to support smaller projects, or even that of size like Bitwarden.Cough cough, that’s true the biggest cost is salary 17,097,933. But 10 millions are paid to C-Suite and 4mil to contractors who do the job. https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2024/b200-mozilla-foundation-form-990-public-disclosure-ty23.pdf Just look into the books.
Yeah but the line between them and google is not there anymore in that case
sometimes bound to give, if firefox isnt taking in money from having no ads, to having ads. they are going to need tons of ads, and the ability to sell your browser info for money, much like chrome is doing. surprised its taken this long to finally say “private donations isnt enough”
Damn we really can’t have anything nice.
Guys Mullvad browser and Librewolf exist.
LibreWolf is annoying in that it doesn’t work on my Mac with VPN split tunneling, a seemingly known issue they haven’t fixed.
Zen Browser too
Do they support ubo?
they’re firefox forks and ubo comes automatically installed with them.
I have librewolf, don’t use it much. Is it functionally the same as FF? In terms of plug-in and website compatibility.
Most consumer sites are optimized for chrome and even safari, firefox & Edge (Obviously) face issues with scripts and plug-ins.
It’s basically the same, but the devil is in the detail. DRM disabled from the get go, which is a show stopper for some sites (say, netflix). Some sites will bork themselve on the strange user-agent. Some advanced privacy features are quite hard to disable willingly, which may or may not be a good thing if you actually have to get things done on sites that breaks.
One would argue that sites that breaks when privacy features are enforced are not worth it, but you don’t always have a choice in that regard.
Most consumer sites are optimized for chrome and even safari, firefox & Edge (Obviously) face issues with scripts and plug-ins.
This is why it’s dangerous that Chrome has such a large amount of market share. Instead of using standard features, sites are using Chrome-specific features and even relying on Chrome bugs that don’t exist in other browsers. It’s exactly the same reason Internet Explorer was bad.
The only acceptable privacy policy for a browser is “we won’t fucking look into anything, take anything, nor send anything anywhere you didn’t actually wish to send explicitly”.
Firefox have an extension system. If mozilla wants to bloat it, they should do it via extension, so that they’re not bloating the actually useful part. As it is, all they’re doing is forcing more work on people to manage forks to remove all the shit every time they push a release.
/usr/lib/firefox-esr/browser/features
has- formautofill@mozilla.org.xpi
- pictureinpicture@mozilla.org.xpi
- screenshots@mozilla.org.xpi
- webcompat-reporter@mozilla.org.xpi
- webcompat@mozilla.org.xpi
hey, why is this significant? I can guess what features these are linked to, but is there any significance to the email address-like formats?
They are the demanded features-as-extension, shipped by default. They do that since they got rid of XUL i think?
About the @, no clue.
Is this because some middle manager at Mozilla has to pretend to be productive?
No it’s because Firefox isn’t profitable and to try to survive in its current form they have to do something.
It might be more productive to die and live on as an open source effort. I personally doubt there’s enough open source engagement to keep Firefox current and competitive but it’s of course an alternative Mozilla in its current form is unable to consider.
they have to dip something for sure. THEY HAVE TO REDUCE THE CEO PAY BY MEASLY 20% AND FUND DEVELOPMENT FROM THAT!!!
or by even more.
Mozilla is a nonprofit (or it at least it should be, technically it’s a for profit corporation that’s wholly owned by a nonprofit foundation, shady asf).
They shouldn’t be trying to make a profit, they should make enough money to pay their programmers to maintain the browser.
They should not be dumping money into more executive hires and AI bullshit like they are doing.
They are losing money and their business model is not breaking even. I want getting to make a governance point (though I agree with yours), merely saying they are desperate.
Being a “non-profit” doesn’t mean the company “shouldn’t make profit” … It means that the owners/investors don’t earn anything extra based on profit. The organization itself still needs to be financially sustainable.
As shady as Mozilla is, they’re competing against a functional monopoly, so the playing field is hardly fair.
As shady as Mozilla is, they’re competing against a functional monopoly
yeah this is a part we need to recognize. right now there are essentially three browsers. Chrome, Safari, and Firefox. Every other browser is some derivative of one of these- mostly Chromium.
Google can change some small detail about how they render HTML or a small part of their JS engine and that has global effects all over the internet. Without a Firefox to compete, they will implement policies to hurt the consumer. People think just because Chromium is open source that this mitigates the risk.
Google’s V8 javascript engine does not only power all Chrome and chrome-derivatives, it also powers nodeJS and therefore vast swathes of server-side javascript as well.
it’s actually difficult to understate how much raw power Google has in determining what you see on the internet and how you see it
we desperately need Firefox. I really hope that an open source alternative could be viable but it’s been decades and we haven’t had a real browser pop into existence. will the death of Firefox mean something else comes out? Or will the death of Firefox be the last nail in the coffin for a free internet?
Most non-profits are not financially sustainable and rely on donations and grants to operate. If the service they provided could be financially sustainable, a for-profit would popup and operate in that space.
But I agree that non-profits can and should find fee-for-service opportunities and generate revenue to reduce their reliance on gifts.
Fair enough. Although, for those reading at home, I’ll reiterate the distinction between nonprofit and charity; all charities are nonprofits, not all nonprofits are charities. Research universities are an example.
On that note, I guess I’m enough of an academic to not consider grants a “gift” … It’s not consumerism-driven revenue, but it’s hard to call it a gift when you’re on the hook to produce something (research papers & prototypes) that you then turn around and use to sell for more revenue (in the form of grants).
ladybird can’t come fast enough
Ladybird has a platinum sponsorship on their homepage from Shopify so not a good look already.
Well it’s a sponsor, it’s not their product.
What’s that saying about sitting at a table with a Nazi?
Building a browser from scratch is going to cost well over a million dollars in development costs. I don’t think they’d be able to achieve it without sponsors.
I’m not saying they shouldn’t seek funding, but maybe not from companies that hosted and sold literally Nazi tshirts.
For realsies
I’ve been willingly enabling data collection features for Mozilla but I guess that time is revolute, they don’t feel trustworthy anymore.
Same here. Just turned off all data collection checkboxes. Fuck Mozilla!
and then, “uh, we are removing the URL bar in the next version because our statistics say nobody uses it!!”
and then, “uh, we are removing the URL bar in the next version because our statistics say nobody uses it!!”
Wtf is happening, why is now even Firefox going off the rails?
You missed the previous memo: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-leadership-growth-planning-updates/
The writing was on the wall when the Mozilla Corporation was setup under the Foundation. A bunch of SF venture capital types have places on the board, and are in operational leadership, and are slowly transforming Mozilla into a shitty for-profit tech venture. Ads, data collection, subscription services, and a chat bot.
probably saw all the money by having thier browsers info being sold off to companies, like with chrome, and google and reddit/OPEN AI collusion.
Oh, that last paragraph doesn’t give me hope at all. Fucking AI chatbots.
The actual addition to the terms is essentially this:
- If you choose to use the optional AI chatbot sidebar feature, you’re subject to the ToS and Privacy Policy of the provider you use, just as if you’d gone to their site and used it directly. This is obvious.
- Mozilla will collect light data on usage, such as how frequently people use the feature overall, and how long the strings of text are that are being pasted in. That’s basically it.
The way this article describes it as “cushy caveats” is completely misleading. It’s quite literally just “If you use a feature that integrates with third party services, you’re relying on and providing data to those services, also we want to know if the feature is actually being used and how much.”
The problem is the inclusion of the feature to begin with. It should be an opt in add install.
I agree to a point, but I look at this similar to how I’d view any feature in a browser. Sometimes there are features added that I don’t use, and thus, I simply won’t use them.
This would be a problem for me if it was an “assistant” that automatically popped up over pages I was on to offer “help,” but it’s not. It’s just a sidebar you can click a button in the menu to pop out, or you can never click that button and you’ll never have to look at it.
It’s not a feature that auto-enables in a way that actually starts sending data to any AI company, it’s just an optional interface, that you have to click a specific button to open, that can then interface with a given AI model if you choose to use it. If you don’t want to use it, then you ideally won’t even see it open during your use of Firefox.
Please let them not ruin Firefox with some bullshit AI. I can’t take much more of this, Firefox is one of the last things I have left.
It’s two things:
- Sidebar you can open from the hamburger menu that is basically just a tiny chat UI
- Right click to paste the selected text into the sidebar
If you don’t want it, they don’t seem to be pushing it any further than that. Just don’t click the option in the menus and you’ll be fine. (I believe you can also fully disable the option from appearing in settings too)
Yes, I gathered that from the previous comment, but thank you for the additional info.
I just hope it doesn’t progress further in the future. AI is quite possibly a more catastrophic technological development than nuclear weapons.
AI is quite possibly a more catastrophic technological development than nuclear weapons.
I wouldn’t go that far. A technology that wastes a lot of energy and creates a lot of bad quality content isn’t the same as a bomb that directly kills millions.
NOOOOOOO AI BAD ALL THE TIME THERE ARE NO CONCEIVABLE USE CASES FOR AI ITS ALL SLOP NOOOOOOO
Correct 😎
Ok but it kinda is though
Give an example, a first-person example, where it is not slop.
as a glorified search engine, after pretty much all search indexes were neutered on purpose…but even then it’s…mostly passable, but always untrustworthy.
That’s good to know actually.
So phone-home telemetry that you can’t opt out of. The ghost of Mitchell Baker will haunt us forever.
So phone-home telemetry that you can’t opt out of.
You can opt out of it. You’ve always been able to opt out of Mozilla’s telemetry. Not to mention that if you actually read the Privacy Notice, there’s an entire section detailing every single piece of telemetry that Mozilla collects, and if you read the section very clearly titled “To provide AI chatbots,” you’ll see what’s collected:
- Technical data
- Location
- Settings data
- Unique identifiers
- Interaction data
The consent required for the collection to even start:
Our lawful basis
Consent, when you choose to enable an AI Chatbot.
And links that lead to the page explaining how to turn off telemetry even if you’re using the in-beta AI features.
It says they’re going to collect usage data. Nothing about opting out.
Look at the links in my comment, and you’ll see that all of the categories of telemetry data there can be opted out of with that single switch.
JFC please read the actual documents instead of going “nothing about opting out” when it’s literally right there.
They use the term telemetry in a special way. If they are collecting info from users, that is telemetry under a different name, ok fine. Not collecting info means they receive 0 bits.
I truly don’t understand what point you’re trying to make here.
Mozilla defines telemetry as “data collection.” Any collection of data by Mozilla is considered telemetry, as is described by the docs page that is cited on the Telemetry Collection & Deletion page.
If you deselect the Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla option, this disables all telemetry, or in other words, all data collection by Mozilla.
Privacy policies should legally be called surveillance policies.
Or “Invasion of Privacy” Policy
So now what the hell do we have to use to not be spied upon?
probably anti-detection browser that ban evaders are using on reddit. its a little more complicated to get to that point though.
Well I suppose LibreWolf (or some other de-branded Firefox) will become more mainstream. Similar to what chromium is to chrome 🤷
That’s not a real equivalence.
Chromium is the basis for Google Chrome, while Librewolf is nothing more than a leech to Firefox. It’s just Firefox, rebranded.
Rebranded, pre-cleaned of all the forced stuff from mozilla, with the built-in integration of more privacy-enhancing features.
So, not “just firefox, rebranded” at all.
They aren’t developing or maintaining the core browser though, they depend on Firefox still being looked after.
If we are comparing it to Chrome, it is more like Ungoogled-Chromium.
In the good/bad old days a web page was just text and images but now a browser is a platform for running software. Each website can do useful computing for the user but the software author is in control and always tempted to make it run for them at the expenve of the user.
Crazy idea, maybe we shouldn’t use web browsers.
Soon other web engine will coming, first LadyBird browser and two is Servo Browser. But they’re still along way to go
soon! they can come any year now!
Am I missing something on Servo Browser? Because when I went to check it out and seems more like next-gen browser engine that looks to be an improvement on Firefox’s Gecko. If so then we will need to wait for a browser team to adopt it.
Servo is also building a web browser UI.
But isn’t Servo funded by Mozilla
After Mozilla laid off all Servo developers in 2020, governance of the project was transferred to Linux Foundation Europe. Development work officially continues at the same GitHub repository with the project itself entirely volunteer driven.
I am still waiting desperately for a servo based browser, mozilla kicking it out was one of the reasons I lost all hope in Mozilla a while back.
Librewolf is still a good alternative
Good thing LibreWolf and other forks exist, including hard forks like the Goanna browsers.
