not allowed to watch porn on Firefox anymore
@hailey thatโ€™s been a thing for years afaik
@luana @hailey thatโ€™s the acceptable use policy for their services, not their browser. Itโ€™s not an unreasonable policy for *some* of their services, but it was definitely not appropriately written for them to suddenly apply it to the browser.

@porglezomp @luana @hailey they wrote they expect them to apply to the browser as well.

I want to see how that is supposed to work with a FOSS licence and already asked the Debian packagers about this. /cc @Andres4NY @RichiH for this detail (I Ccโ€™d to d-legal for public archive)

@mirabilos @porglezomp @luana @hailey @Andres4NY I haven't looked into this, but my gut feeling is that this will be about Firefox-the-trademarked-name and not about firefox-the-codebase.

Iceweasel was a reaction to other trademark overshoots; I'd prefer not to change my muscle memory yet again, but at the end of the day it doesn't bother me too much

Debian should explore having packages and symlinks in place to avoid last cycle's end user pain, though

@hailey @RichiH @luana @porglezomp @Andres4NY yeah. But ideally an iceweasel without any Mozilla services (including those annoyinng phone-home features on the start, newtab and post-update pages) would be available again.
@mirabilos @hailey @RichiH @luana @porglezomp There's a few different ITPs open for various firefox forks (https://bugs.debian.org/885405 , https://bugs.debian.org/981291 ); I don't know if they'll ever get packaged (and if they even should, given the resources needed from the security team to support them in a stable release), but I could imagine firefox being a symlink to one of multiple forks.
#885405 - RFP: waterfox -- graphical web browser based on Firefox - Debian Bug report logs