top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 332 points 8 months ago (8 children)

Important context!

They had to change this because newer laws like the CCPA classify some ways of transferring/processing data as a "sale", even if no money is exchanged.

See: this Firefox FAQ where they say:

The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

Similar privacy laws exist in other US states, including in Virginia and Colorado. And that’s a good thing — Mozilla has long been a supporter of data privacy laws that empower people — but the competing interpretations of do-not-sell requirements does leave many businesses uncertain about their exact obligations and whether or not they’re considered to be “selling data.”

In order to make Firefox commercially viable, there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar. We set all of this out in our privacy notice. Whenever we share data with our partners, we put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share is stripped of potentially identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

We’re continuing to make sure that Firefox provides you with sensible default settings that you can review during onboarding or adjust at any time.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 71 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

    Yes. That is selling. If you exchange customer data for money or other valuables, that is the definition of "selling".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Not in all cases.

    As an example, Firefox has the option of sponsored results, which send anonymized technical data when a link is clicked, essentially just saying "hey, this got an ad click, add it to the total." It doesn't send info about you, your identity, or your other browsing habits.

    This counts as a "sale" even though no actual identifying information about you was exchanged. They mention this in the paragraphs I attached, when they talk about data sent via OHTTP.

    I don't think any reasonable person would consider a packet being sent saying "some unknown user, somewhere in the world clicked your sponsored post" as "selling your personal information", but that's how the CCPA could be used to classify it, so to avoid getting in legal trouble, Firefox can't technically say that they "never sell your data", even if that's the extent of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    This counts as a “sale” even though no actual identifying information about you was exchanged. They mention this in the paragraphs I attached, when they talk about data sent via OHTTP.

    I mean... it should count as a sale, because it's a sale. They are selling information about browsing habits for money. Regardless of whether they include identifying information, it is still personal data that they are selling. They removed that line from their FAQs because they changed their minds about selling personal data. It has fuck all to do with weird legal definitions. They promised they wouldn't ever sell personal data, and then they were like "wellll......"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    "Selling personal data" and "selling ads that we can tell if they are clicked by an anonymous user" are completely different, in my eyes at least.

    "Selling personal data" sounds like someone taking your personally identifiable information and giving it to someone for money. What they're doing isn't that, so they're not "selling personal data"

    They're selling ad views, not your information.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago*

    That data is about as personal as someone sitting in a park keeping a tally of how many people with a blue jacket walk by. "Somebody posted a comment on lemmy" is not the same as "@elbucho@lemmy.world posted a comment on lemmy".

    Particularly if you opt out (as I have) and no tally mark is added for you.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 26 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    The text you quoted sounds like a reasonable and normal definition of a sale to me. i.e. transferring to another business in exchange for something else of value.

    So yeah, Firefox previously promised not to do this, "not ever", and now they say they need to do sell your personal data "in order to make Firefox commercially viable".

    But hang on a second... Firefox is not a commercial product. So making it 'commercially viable' is highly questionable in itself.


    It's a shame that Mozilla's current leadership is more interested in self-enrichment than in the past. But Firefox is still the very best option by far. I hope that the Ladybird project becomes strong the future, if for no other reason than pressure Firefox into staying good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    This isn't reassuring. They're saying they don't receive money for my personal data, but they do give it to other businesses in exchange for something valuable. To me, that's selling my data.

    That said, I do appreciate the context.

    Edit: I also appreciate the work Mozilla is doing, and in fact I am a monthly donor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 282 points 8 months ago (15 children)
  • [–] 125 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Theo is a shill and product expert masquerading as a 10x developer when at best he's an intermediate web dev

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Not even intermediate. He makes so many bad calls that it’s honestly great to watch him to know what not to do. You’ll be right about 95+% of the time.

    I had to stop watching him though because I’d spend hours writing up comments to correct everything he said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago

    I realized when he was talking about mongodb and completely failed to understand the issue he had with it was strictly a design issue created by the team he worked with (or potentially by him)

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] 80 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Yes we all know mozilla sucks, still ff is the best browser by far

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 66 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Didn't Firefox just release a new feature that prevents fingerprinting? Hard to get a reading on Mozilla these days.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 217 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    It's because people looked at a line of a diff without looking at the actual context.
    It's like finding the line in a diff where someone deleted a call to "check password" and concluding that this means the service is no longer verifying passwords.

    https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/

    https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/faq/

    We never sell your personal data. Unlike other big tech companies that collect and profit off your personal information, we’re built with privacy as the default. We don’t know your age, gender, precise location, or other information Big Tech collects and profits from.

    Basically, they consolidated and clarified their data privacy policies to be legally accurate. People took a content change to be a policy change on the assumption that you can't just delete words in one place and put new ones somewhere else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • [–] 64 points 8 months ago* (12 children)
    load more comments (12 replies)
    [–] 44 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Fuck that guy, all he does is make ragebait

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 39 points 8 months ago (3 children)
    load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 30 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Theo to me had the same energy as Pirate Software. One of these days there's gonna be some cancelling, someone mark these words.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 8 months ago

    Reminds me of the time Google decided that "Don't be evil" wasn't their vibe any more.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 8 months ago
    [–] 12 points 8 months ago

    throw std::future_error(std::make_error_code(std::future_errc::broken_promise));

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›