Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 17th Dec 2017 19:39 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones

For a long time, it was just setting the default search provider to Google in exchange for a beefy stipend. Later, paid links in your new tab page were added. Then, a proprietary service, Pocket, was bundled into the browser - not as an addon, but a hardcoded feature. In the past few days, we’ve discovered an advertisement in the form of browser extension was sideloaded into user browsers. Whoever is leading these decisions at Mozilla needs to be stopped.

Mozilla garnered a lot of fully deserved goodwill with the most recent Firefox release, and here they are, jeopardising all that hard work. People expect this kind of nonsense from Google, Apple, or Microsoft - not Mozilla. Is it unfair to judge Mozilla much more harshly than those others? Perhaps, but that's a consequence of appealing to more demanding users when it comes to privacy and open source.

Thread beginning with comment 652180
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Another nail
by Morgan on Tue 19th Dec 2017 04:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Another nail"
Member since:

Nope. Besides being Firefox-based and therefore ultimately subject to Mozilla's upstream decisions, there are a few things about it that bug me.

Waterfox is partners with Ecosia, a search engine that plants trees with its generated revenues.

While this is a noble cause, it's still running my searches through a search engine that generates revenue based on mining my search data, tying it to my identity, and logging visited links. I'm opposed to that on principle[1].

Webpage and technical data to Google’s SafeBrowsing service: To help protect you from malicious downloads, Firefox sends basic information about unrecognized downloads to Google's SafeBrowsing Service, including the filename and the URL it was downloaded from. Learn more or read Google’s Privacy Policy. Opting out prevents Firefox from warning you of potentially illegitimate or malicious websites or downloaded files.

First, they should consider replacing "Firefox" with "Waterfox" to avoid confusion. Second, this clause in their privacy policy shows they are still sending every single file you download through Google's wringer, and they make it sound ominous and scary if you opt out. Google is no longer allowed anywhere near my devices and my life.

So really, it's Firefox with a different pelt. No thanks.

[1] So how do I search at all, you may ask? I use, which generates revenue by completely divorcing your current search from any identifying information such as IP address and browser fingerprint, and uses those keywords alone to generate ad links. If you don't click the ad links, the advertisers don't know you exist. They don't store past searches and they don't tie the active search to your identity.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Another nail
by Kochise on Tue 19th Dec 2017 05:54 in reply to "RE[2]: Another nail"
Kochise Member since:

There will always be blood, but focusing on search engine while you can safely turn to duckduck as a personal choice, which is a no brainer. I was mostly referring to this feature list of missing quirks :

Disabled Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)
Disabled Web Runtime (deprecated as of 2015)
Removed Pocket
Removed Telemetry
Removed data collection
Removed startup profiling
Allow running of all 64-Bit NPAPI plugins
Allow running of unsigned extensions
Removal of Sponsored Tiles on New Tab Page
Addition of Duplicate Tab option
Locale selector in about:preferences > General

Reply Parent Score: 0