flamingos-cant (hopepunk arc)Mozilla did something good!
maxwells_daemonStill does telemetry, and allows easy fingerprinting by default. Use Librewolf instead.
Or you can just opt out if you don’t think Mozilla should have this data which is strictly about the browser and whether it’s the default browser, and which in no way compromises any personal info.
Just because something uses telemetry doesn’t mean it’s used in a way that compromises your personal data.
Google, Microsoft, Facebook and many others do that, Mozilla/Firefox does not.
FF in my experience respects settings too. MS straight up ignores or resets them silently, and Google goes full dark patterns and/or creates new settings to nickel and dime you on data
Facebook no experience, dumped that shit in like 09
MS straight up ignores or resets them silently
That was the thing that bothered me the most. Sure I could go through every subsystem individually and make the changes to make the system more private and secure. That would take a while to do manually, or use one of the tools that do this. But, every time anything has an update you can’t trust that it didn’t reset a setting.
Running the tool after every update is annoying and after a while it just got frustrating to see settings, that I know I’ve disabled (because, the tool does it every time), which are now re-activated thanks to an update.
It’s just scummy behavior.
When I installed win10 it straight up ignored every single choice I made in the oobe. It may as well have not existed
You probably missed the news. But Firefox is becoming a data seller too.
Recently they updated their policies, since they are on GitHub you can see the exact changes.
One of them was the elimination of a phrase like “we won’t sell your data, and that’s a promise”. So promise broken I guess.
You probably missed the news.
No I did not, but did you ever stop to wonder why there is so much anti Firefox propaganda, as Google is trying to prevent ad-blockers?
Manage technical and interaction data collection settings in Firefox:
…mozilla.org/…/technical-and-interaction-data
What is technical and interaction data?:
…mozilla.org/…/technical-and-interaction-data#w_w…
information about how Firefox functions on your device and how you use its features. This includes performance details like page load times, and memory usage, as well as insights into which Firefox features you interact with, such as bookmarks, tabs or settings. Additionally, it collects general device information, including your operating system, browser version and hardware specifications. Mozilla uses this data to enhance Firefox while respecting your privacy.
There is zero, zip, zilch, nada personalo info collected.
So please point out to me which of these it is that worries you?
Also please point out which of these it is you think Mozilla would be able to sell?
Firefox is becoming a data seller too.
I think that technically that is libel!
It is not propaganda as it is factual information. If you believe this is 4D chess from Google to manipulate us to dislike Firefox you are out of your mind. github.com/…/d459addab846d8144b61939b7f4310eb80c5… this is an actual commit made by mozilla. It was not made by Google.
Changes include:
- Removing “we don’t sell access to your data”. Curiously this change is only for the TOU. Presumable because that is legally binding. Idk where the “else” branch is displayed though.
- Removing this question from FAQ: "Does Firefox sell your personal data? Nope. Never has, never will (…). That’s a promise"
- Remove another mention in the TOU “and we don’t sell your personal data”. That again was not removed from the “else” branch
That to me indicates one of the following:
- They have started selling data.
- They plan on selling data in the near future.
- They don’t feel confident that they can keep that promise forever. That is, they see a future where they sell data.
I don’t like either of those alternatives.
I don’t know if they are able to sell the data you mentioned. Because I’m not in the enshittification minds of giant American corporations. 20 years ago people would laugh at the idea of buying data about the screen size of a user. But now they do, and use it for fingerprinting. If recent history has shown anything is that most data has some kind of value. And giant corporations will find their way to use that data against users.
I’ve seen way too many companies that were supposed to be the cool kids and were doing everything morally enshittify. There’s no reason to believe Mozilla is going to be different. They’re showing the same signs.
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 <[email protected]> --------- Co-authored-by: maureenlholland <...
I never claimed they didn’t remove those lines.
But your screen size is NOT personal info.
Also this line was in my previous post:
Mozilla uses this data to enhance Firefox while respecting your privacy.
So how do you imagine selling personal data is respecting privacy?
Again what you are doing could be libel, you have zero evidence to back up your claim, it’s pure speculation.
lime!by the way some people talk here you’d think “telemetry” was a synonym to “satanism”.
telemetry is not automatically evil.
It would be ok if it was opt in
and if there were laws with actual penalties which ensured that it was only used for providing the service and not assimilated into a data broker database so that they can guess which shampoo I’m going to buy or which brown people they can kidnap.
A man can dream
The EU has been making some good progress in that direction luckily
The vast majority of progress on privacy rights and electronics regulation for the US Consumer is because of EU regulations.
We’re unlikely to see any progress domestically anytime soon.
since 99% of users never touch a single setting on their computers, being opt-in makes telemetry functionally useless.
henfredemarsI thought they specifically take anti-fingerprinting measures by default? Is this not true?
Jean-luc Peak-hardThey do, but just like anything dealing with security or privacy, there are degrees of inconvenience and "breaking" that are not suited for every situation.
Firefox is a good default, but if you want more privacy, LibreWolf is an option. LibreWolf configures more settings by default to protect your privacy— but these come at a cost. The cost being that more websites are likely to break and/or need "fixing". Look at the list of features that LibreWolf may break here [0]. This is not a browser for your general family or someone who just wants things to "work".
Interestingly, LibreWolf disable Google Safe Browsing, which they actually recommend you enable as Firefox has implemented it in a privacy preserving way. The devs disable it by default in LibrewWolf for a semi-technical reason [1]. Without Google Safe Browsing you will not get warned about dangerous sites known for phishing, malware, or unwanted software. Technically inclined people may not want this, but I would never disable this feature for friends/family as that would put them at risk.
Lastly, if your friends/family ran into website that doesn't work, they will not be troubleshooting the problem or trying to find a workaround. They will uninstall the browser and go running back to Chrome- this is the fine line that Firefox needs to navigate to ensure they protect user privacy, but don't inconvenience those who don't have the technical chops or patience.
[0] https://librewolf.net/docs/faq/#what-are-the-most-common-downsides-of-rfp-resist-fingerprinting
[1] https://librewolf.net/docs/faq/#why-do-you-disable-google-safe-browsing
Well said
TropicalDingdongOh thank god. I’ve been getting crushed by memory sucking tabs.
DrDystopiaLaughs in automatic tab suspender
I can tell, almost double the tabs and still no system crash ! I think it’s just discard tabs more aggressively but still, that’s better than crashing
My experience with childhood computers conditioned me to close everything instantly when I’m done with it even if it means I might have to reload the page later.
1GB RAM netbook represent
wheezy1GB. Massive. Why would anyone need a WHOLE gigabyte of RAM? What am I gonna do with that? Store my entire video collection in volatile memory?
For my twelve desktop widgets obviously
Giving me PTSD going from XP to Vista.
Possibly linux- network equipment vendors
I got a forced restart today.
Hopefully the last time
macnielthat forced restart is probably going to be a huge win for our rolling release brothers and sisters.
I believe, Firefox bugfix releases get rolled out pretty quickly on most non-rolling distros, too, so I don’t think it’s a terribly different experience, unless you’re on a distro with Firefox ESR, like e.g. Debian.
Can you expand on this a little for a new guy who is considering a switch from Mint to Debian?
In my understanding Firefox ESR is like a stable, longstanding version that doesn’t get frequent little updates but still gets occasional large updates. (Like 1.0, 1.1, etc. rather than 1.0, 1.0.1, 1.0.2, etc.)
Is there a measurable difference in the user experience and or security of ESR?
And is Debian actually restricted to ESR?
I don’t know how the timing of each release but the Firefox website gives instructions for using the repositories for esr, beta, nightly, or dev edition.
Just using Debian as your distro doesn’t lock you into firefox ESR.
Sure. Here’s a high-level page which I’ll be kind of going off of: …mozilla.org/…/choosing-firefox-update-channel
But basically, Firefox ESR (“Extended Support Release”) means that you still get security fixes in a timely manner, but feature updates are delayed. Firefox normally gets feature updates every 4 weeks, whereas ESR averages one (larger) feature update per year. You might know such a model as LTS (“Long-Term Support”) release from other software.
Essentially, the current ‘normal’ Firefox version is 141.0, whereas the ESR version is 128.13.0.
Mozilla does maintain a separate changelog for ESR, but basically it’s as if from 129.0 onwards, you only included the “Fixed”, none of the “New” or “Changed” stuff.
The next ESR will be based off of Firefox 140, as can be seen in their release calendar, so this change that OP praises here will not make it into ESR for another year or so.
And then you gotta also pay the Debian toll, which is that they won’t upgrade to the newest ESR right away either. 😅
Mozilla actually still maintains the Firefox ESR based on version 115, which is about to be discontinued with the new ESR major release.
Debian will typically maintain the ESR even beyond that (Firefox is open-source, so they can retrofit patches themselves), because they have an even longer support lifecycle for their OS release. But I believe, if you always upgrade to the newest Debian release as they make them available, you should be covered by the Mozilla-supported ESR at all times.
If you do not want to pay the Debian toll (not just for Firefox, but any software where you care about new features), then Flatpaks are typically the solution of choice. It’s a different way of installing software, which allows you to get the newest version, independent from what Debian is doing.
But back to the normal Debian experience. How does it affect the user experience for Firefox? Well, we’ve already covered that others may be happy about new features when you’ve gotta take solace in your disgustingly stable software.
These feature updates also include the newest support for web standards, so it’s theoretically possible that a webpage doesn’t work right in ESR. In practice, I don’t think this happens very often, because webdevs can’t use the newest web standards right away anyways. There’s always gonna be users on old browsers or there’s whole browsers which don’t support the new stuff right away.
How does it affect security? Generally, ESR is secure. Occasionally, the feature updates might introduce security-relevant stuff, too, like when they switched to the multi-process architecture, that brought along much better isolation and you can’t just retrofit that into ESR. But yeah, this isn’t the norm. You shouldn’t be particularly worried about security. You do get the normal patches in a timely manner.
Well, and to infodump a little more, you could also take a look at Linux Mint Debian Edition. It’s Linux Mint, but instead of Ubuntu underneath, it’s Debian underneath.
Ubuntu is actually itself based on Debian, so I’ve heard LMDE described as “What does basing it on Ubuntu even add? LMDE feels exactly the same as normal Linux Mint.”.
Of course, if you’re switching because you want to try something different, that would be counterproductive. 🫠
Thanks so much for the informative and detailed reply. That pretty much answers every question.
Thanks also for the tip about LMDE. I actually really like Mint, I’m only switching because it’s the only distro I’ve tried and I feel like I should shop around a bit. Going to Debian because while starting my journey I want to shop around with things that work, rather than having to learn how to tinker all at once just to get things running. But if I decide I need Mint back I’ll probably check out LMDE for the hell of it.
You may also just add the LMDE repo and install the standard, non ESR version of Firefox from that one.
cygnusWhy? I already reboot daily because everything gets updated so much. (I’m into that)
Shady_ShiroeWhen you get into servers, uptime becomes your drug
Firefox on a server?
DonutsRMehI think some servers have an actual DE and all. If I remember correctly, I’ve seen centos with gnome.
I installed a DE on my server, I just disable sddm unless I need to do something in a web browser on that machine. I haven’t needed to yet, but I have it just in case.
randintVery true. I used to poweroff my laptop every day, but now, after getting into servers, I sometimes leave my laptop up overnight (even though the laptop isn’t the server)
Why waste energy and lifetime of a machine so it sits there and does nothing?
exuIt really shouldn’t though. Reboot your servers
I run Ubuntu Server on my server, but on my computer I want updates as soon as humanly possible.
I’ve got a super ignorant question; Is the situation with session saving on Linux desktop environments with default settings finally locked in enough that you literally can’t tell when a reboot has happened once the session is restored? Including user space apps? _Redacted_OS has been so good at this for so long that I literally don’t think about uptime on my daily driver anymore.
I’m on KDE and I’m not doing anything special regarding this, and for me the answer to this question “somewhat”. I specifically hate when apps are starting by themselves so they don’t do for me and I’m happy about it. But when I turn on most apps that I use they open in the state I closed them in.
jumping redditor [they/them]no, at least not if you’re doing anything with poorly supported hardware with it’s own configuration tools that reset when it loses power (it is powered when the computer is on but sometimes stays powered through reboots)
Why?
Does one reboot their entire system after updating Firefox on Linux?
I never do. I don’t even restart Firefox after updating, if it is already running.
Eugene V. Debs' GhostI never do. I don’t even restart Firefox after updating, if it is already running.
Clearly you don’t use it often, firefox will force you to restart itself and refuse to render webpages.
I guess I am lucky that it does not refuse to work since it is my default browser across all my machines.
Linux machines?
Because on my Linux machines, once it’s been updated, I can not open a new tab, it’ll tell me to frig off and restart. I can click links in existing tabs, and might’ve been possible to enter a new URL in an existing tab, I don’t recall exactly.
Can you even update Firefox while it’s running if you’re on windows?
No idea lol
On Linux:
- an application’s files can be updated while the application is running, and
- there’s an OS-wide updater (i.e. package manager) with which you can update most software, including Firefox. (You can also get Firefox with its built-in auto-updater, but most people prefer the OS-wide updater.)
Both of these are good things. But Firefox, with its relatively advanced multi-process architecture, had a problem here, because it could happen that its files got updated while it was running and then when it started a new process, this new process might be incompatible with the old processes, therefore unable to communicate correctly.
Their initial solution was to force you to quit Firefox and reopen it, when they detected that the files had changed and you did something in Firefox which might need a new process, so primarily when opening a new tab.
I’m guessing, they now implemented a way to launch the new process by still using the old files from before the update.
Getting rid of that forced restart will at least help me personally stay more secure and get bug fixes faster
VoidJuiceConcentrate… i was supposed to be restarting after updating Firefox???
halcyoncmdrJust restarting Firefox, not the entire system.
Which doesn’t really matter for 99.99% of users that are sane and only use a couple windows and tabs at a time. Saving things they aren’t actively using anymore as bookmarks and using the browsing history for anything they closed previously but need again.
For the 0.01% of insane but vocal users that never close tabs and/or keep dozens of windows open, that’s a big deal.
ah, then yeah I just have “restore previous tabs” selected and restart the app, no biggie
Yeah that’s what those of us that are sane experience, but that only works for the last window closed.