Mastodawn

Xandru ⁂Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP Thanks for uploading the episodes to peertube nick. I recently abandoned YT and you are one of the few good ones who does both, wich is appreciated

Tom McC Mar 12

@Xandru @thelinuxEXP hi, do you have a link to the peertube video? Thanks!

@tommcc @Xandru @thelinuxEXP https://tilvids.com/w/ssV7mEKnwhFfJhnxSWGCTk

Kia | کیا Mar 13

Clarifying what's happening at Mozilla: an Interview with Ryan Sipes from Thunderbird

PeerTube

@thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes

“Why this had to happen”? Well, that's certainly ominous and gaslight-y (because no, it didn't have to happen).

Will #Mozilla next be asserting the right to scrape and sell the contents of our emails as well?

#Thunderbird

@argv_minus_one @thelinuxEXP absolutely not. We will never collect or sell the contents of emails or any of your personal data in Thunderbird.

James Mar 13

@ryanleesipes @argv_minus_one @thelinuxEXP Great interview thanks both. I believe Ryan has our best interests at heart. But Mozilla at large has shown it is OK to roll back on those promises rather than change features that would uphold those promises.
https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b61939b7f4310eb80c5470e#diff-5c93e7e7cbfacf0d6a8b3bc6d46b345019653051089e00d6fe5e09a531a79442R70

Tos copy updates (fix #16016) (#16018) · mozilla/bedrock@d459add

* ToS copy updates (fix #16016) * Apply suggestions from code review - copy change Co-authored-by: maureenlholland <maureen@silverorange.com> --------- Co-authored-by: maureenlholland &lt...

GitHub

@argv_minus_one @ryanleesipes It actually did have to happen, du to regulator pressures. How it was done isn’t good, IMO, but they did have to add terms of use.

Quoth the ToU announcement:

> 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.”

Mozilla is not supposed to be doing any of that!

@argv_minus_one @thelinuxEXP I'll have to ask about this. But I think Firefox is considering the transfer of search queries to Google as a sale of personal data, since they have a default search engine agreement with them.

Do you mean the search suggestions that appear before the user presses Enter to actually perform the search?

Yes, I saw that and find it rather creepy. Novices won't know about the privacy implications of this. Firefox should ask for specific consent for this during setup, like the Microsoft Edge privacy options screen.

Do you mean search queries sent when the user presses Enter in the search box?

I don't see how that qualifies as “personal information” when the user intentionally submits it to Google. But I suppose the lawyers may have a different interpretation. 🤷‍♂️

Either way, what's stopping Mozilla from saying “we don't sell your data except x, y, and z”?

This open-ended “we can take and sell basically anything we want” non-commitment to user privacy doesn't exactly inspire confidence in what was supposed to be a privacy-oriented browser.

3/end

Job Bautista Mar 13

@ryanleesipes How are search queries by themselves "personal data"? Note too that CCPA explicitly excludes de-identified and aggregated data from being qualified as personal information. And searching on Google via Firefox's search bar is not covered by Mozilla's privacy policy, but by Google's, because Firefox is merely just a tool, not a service.

@argv_minus_one @thelinuxEXP

John Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP @argv_minus_one @ryanleesipes FWIW, these changes make Firefox not really a viable option anymore in the current political environment, independent of whether the changes "had to happen."

Such a big change should merit reconsideration of the contract with google rather than the drastic widening of TOS on behalf of all users (esp considering one of the first things I do is disable google as the default search engine).

@johnmarianhoffman @thelinuxEXP @argv_minus_one I can understand that perspective. Bear in mind that the Privacy Policy is still in effect and serves as protection as well. There are also a number of privacy settings that you can further fine-tune how you want Firefox to behave. Because it's all open source, you can verify that these settings do, in fact, do what they say they do. There are many layers of protection for user data beyond the ToS.

John Mar 12

@ryanleesipes @thelinuxEXP @argv_minus_one and also, I have so much love for Mozilla and Firefox and all the work that you all do. Trying to share my perspective in the hopes it can be constructive to the conversation going forward. Thank you!

@johnmarianhoffman @thelinuxEXP @argv_minus_one I appreciate that. I welcome it. Like I said in the video, without these thoughts and these conversations - we're not going to succeed. So I think it's great!

John Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP @argv_minus_one @ryanleesipes thanks for the considered and quick response.

And heard/understood that this is the policy/plan going forward. TBH I do not have faith that the policies and terms will protect my data should someone decide to sell it.

That's not a Mozilla problem, but broadly these moves feel consumer-hostile based on all existing evidence of tech companies rug-pulling data and privacy. I think the burden is on orgs to do better, not users to be more aware of why.

@johnmarianhoffman @thelinuxEXP @argv_minus_one I agree with that. My goal and, I think, all of Mozilla's goal is to figure this out. I just want to reassure people that we are working on this and that it is a conversation and a process. Not something we're happy with just throwing over the wall.

@thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes

Marián Kyral Mar 12

Thanks…

@mkyral @thelinuxEXP thank you for watching.

@thelinuxEXP Great video! I just feel the whole thing has been very poorly communicated. What @ryanleesipes is doing here Mozilla should have been doing from the very beginning. We're a fairly big Firefox redistributor and there has been no communication towards us. And it does make people nervous here.

BTW is there any particular reason why the video is only 720p on PeerTube and 1080p on YouTube?

@sesivany @thelinuxEXP that's a good call out Jiri. We should create some group that facilitates that communication. Are you volunteering for it?

@ryanleesipes @thelinuxEXP I wonder if the enterprise@mozilla.org mailing list could serve as a platform for the communication. I think all people interested in Firefox deployed in an enterprise environment are there. Someone posted a question about it yesterday. But no communication from Mozilla.

@sesivany @ryanleesipes No, it’s likely just because transcoding isn’t finished yet :)

sebulon Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes It's awesome of you to upload to PeerTube, I love that! ❤️

If it's not too much to ask, could you also post PeerTube links in your posts going forward? Because I didn't even know you did that.

@sebulon @sesivany @ryanleesipes You can follow the Peertube channel on Mastodon directly, and get a post for each video automatically ;)

sebulon Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes Yes now I know and I am, thank you! Still, I think it would be great to raise awareness of PeerTube as alternative, as many (like myself) didn't even know about it.

@sesivany @thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes It has also been very poorly communicated by the wider community by making the usual not so useful noise in aiding to understand what's actually happening.

@auser @thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes IMHO it is only amplification of the original poor communication. I don't mean to critise, it's just really hard to get it right sometimes. Speaking from experience. We at Red Hat have had our share of poor public communication. 🙈

@sesivany @auser @ryanleesipes I think we can’t dismiss the entire thing as just miscommunication, and outrage amplifying that. There ARE valid causes for concern behind the stuff that’s has been explained :)

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes Not dismissing the entire thing as miscommunication but miscommunication is a very big problem in social media, specially now, and the FOSS community is not exempt of that. Everybody needs to be more aware of their behavior and try to understand and be empathetic on how things are on the perceived "opposite side" and respond accordingly.

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes In summary: Rants are not helpful feedback.

@auser @sesivany @ryanleesipes I’d counter that by: it’s not necessarily the goal to be productive, or the role of any commentator to be productive.

Ranting and criticizing without offering solutions is 100% ok, and fine. Just because we don’t have a solution, or we don’t show understanding for the 100th miscommunication doesn’t mean what we’re ranting about isn’t valid ;)

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes I don't think ranting is criticizing, or how it should be understood. Criticizing offers arguments and explanations like you did in your video. Ranting does not offer these.

BTW, I'm not directly refringir to you Nick (i like your channel a lot), but there's a thing that content creators could address more explicitly and that probably you are already aware of: How negative communications are sometimes at least part of the fuel of a successful media channel.

@auser @sesivany @ryanleesipes ah well, I guess it depends on what we call « ranting » (most people who listen to my ramblings call my stuff the weekly rant 😁) !

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes I'm sure they mean that kindly 😄

@thelinuxEXP @sesivany @ryanleesipes If it's useful as a reference, here's an example of cynical take on what happened: https://youtu.be/4litc5DxoHQ?feature=shared

These people are actually profiting form situations like these.

FireFox Changes ToS - They Will Sell Your Data

YouTube

@thelinuxEXP There are definitely legitimate concerns. Imagine you have customers who type top secret information into Firefox and you learn without prior notice that ToS now requires them to license all that stuff to Mozilla and it's undercommunicated with "trust us, we are doing it in good faith".
@ryanleesipes

Pavel Machek Mar 13

@sesivany @thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes Just because you have right to copy data does not mean you have right to sublicense data. So Mozilla is just violating copyrights (and claims to make other people violate copyright). That ToS is just not okay, also notice how it can change at any time. I can't believe this is even legal in most of the world.

PondAI Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes I did… something, yay!

Slade Watkins Mar 12

@thelinuxEXP Only a few minutes in, but already I'm greatly appreciating the conversation.

Droppie [infosec] 🐨

Mar 13

@thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes This was just great, Nick. Kudos for doing it. IMO nothing is going to silence the #FUD from the most egregious FUDsters who emerged over the past week or so, but for those of a less conspiratorial bent, who simply were confused, more info like this should help.

Darohan Mar 13

@thelinuxEXP on the regulatory pressure point, this is starting to seem like "we may sell your data" is going to become the new "contains substances known to cause cancer" (California Prop 65) with such a broad definition, which is unfortunate because it will end up diluting the meaning :/

James Mar 13

@thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes I imagine a lot of folks will be watching this like a hawk.

Kevin Mar 13

@thelinuxEXP @ryanleesipes Thanks, tot was really interesting. I learned a lot from the video and the peek behind the Mozilla curtain.