this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2024
144 points (96.8% liked)

Firefox

17952 readers
100 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
k_o_t@lemmy.ml
144
EFF Says Mozilla's PPA is better than Google's Solution (www.fastcompany.com)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by astro_ray@lemdro.id to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Mozilla’s system only measures the success rate of ads—it doesn’t help companies target those ads—and it’s less susceptible to abuse, EFF’s Lena Cohen told @FastCompany@flipboard.com. “It’s much more privacy-preserving than Google’s version of the same feature.”

https://mastodon.social/@eff/112922761259324925

Privacy experts say the new toggle is mostly harmless, but Firefox users saw it as a betrayal.

“They made this technology for advertisers, specifically,” says Jonah Aragon, founder of the Privacy Guides website. “There’s no direct benefit to the user in creating this. It’s software that only serves a party other than the user.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LWD@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's just collecting the same data that people have already opted out of, and more often.

You are also using a misleading statement, either maliciously or unknowingly, to make a false statement:

  • The misleading statement: "advertisers won't know a thing about the people that clicked their ad". While this may allegedly be correct, as Mozilla has claimed it, Mozilla has the capability and the private data (which they sell directly to advertising companies) to do this themselves.
  • The false statement: "Mozilla is not collecting new personal data." You are using Mozilla's statement to assume this is the case, but it is not. Mozilla is collecting the extra personal data directly. Anonymization is not done on your browser.

Due to the fact that Mozilla has broken users trust by sneakily injecting this extra data collection, I don't see any reason a rational person would presume Mozilla should be trusted on further statements regarding their sneaky activity. Do you?

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Of course whoever make my browser had the capability to siphon it all off. But nothing in the PPA news has given me reason to believe that is happening: nobody has pointed out the source code that does it, or intercepted network requests in which they see it happening, or even just been able to name a single piece of personal data that is apparently being sold to advertising companies. You have not done so either.

I also think that if Mozilla was trying to be sneaky, they could have done a better job than literally mentioning it in the release notes.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So by your metric, Mozilla has been dishonest compared to even Google in the data sucking they've implemented, since even Google announced it, correct?

Do you genuinely believe the average user reads the release notes? If you do, I call bullshit.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The main difference between Mozilla and Google is that Google is actually sucking up your data. For example, I can specifically mention that they've got stored where you log in often, what age they think you are, what gender, how rich you likely are, etc. Even if they're completely honest about it, that's not good. You can't make such a list about Mozilla, and Mozilla doesn't actively try to hide what they are doing (non-invasive measurement of ad performance).

Of course, the average user doesn't read the release notes. (I'd go even further: the average user doesn't read anything.) But the only reason you know about PPA, is because Mozilla explicitly called it out in the release notes, after which some bloggers decided to make a stink.

You've accused Mozilla of two separate things:

  1. Collecting personal data (but can't say what data)
  2. Being sneaky about it (but they could just as well not have mentioned it in the release notes and you wouldn't have known)
[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So you agree with #1 but are upset I have not provided specifics... FakeSpot and Anonym privacy policies are downright evil, the specifics are there.

For #2, you also agree with me, you just have a much lower ethical bar than I do for Mozilla. It's always the Mozilla fans who act like it's a terrible company...

Regarding the claim that Mozilla is good and Google is bad, that's based on a presumption. Considering all the terrible behavior Mozilla has engaged in, I see no reason to continue presuming it. It would be as clueless as taking Google at its word with "do no evil."

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

So you agree with #1 but are upset I have not provided specifics...

No; I have claimed that it doesn't collect personal data. You're disputing that claim, but if you can't mention a single piece of data, then I'm not inclined to believe you. (Fakespot and Anonym are completely unrelated to PPA. I'm not necessarily interested in branching out to discussing those as well, though I expect that we're more aligned on them anyway.)

Regarding the claim that Mozilla is good and Google is bad, that's based on a presumption.

No, I'm claiming that Google's actions in the past have been worse than Mozilla's, and I have named concrete actions that Google has done that Mozilla has not.

But go on, keep on telling people to avoid Mozilla, and see if that'll bring us a better world.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No; I have claimed that [Mozilla] doesn't collect personal data... Fakespot and Anonym are completely unrelated to PPA.

Fakespot and Anonym are completely Mozilla Corp. And their privacy policies are a clear violation of the Mozilla Manifesto.

I have named concrete actions that Google has done that Mozilla has not.

I have named concrete privacy policies Mozilla has adopted, but unfortunately you didn't want to look into them.

But go on, keep on telling people to avoid Mozilla

I am using the Mozilla guidelines on how to treat Mozilla: encouraging other people to tell them, plainly and openly, that they need to knock off their terrible behavior.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Again, bringing Fakespot and Anonym is just moving the goalposts. You were complaining about PPA, and have failed to mention concrete data points that shares about you. It's really not interesting to move on to another subject only to have the goalposts moved again.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You said

The main difference between Mozilla and Google is that Google is actually sucking up your data.

I responded to you in kind.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

OK, fair enough, that was me allowing myself getting sidetracked. You still haven't answered the earlier question about what extra data PPA provides anyone, though. I'll leave it at that unless you can name one concrete piece of data.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago

The burden of evidence is on Mozilla to tell us exactly what data they are consuming, down to the byte. Otherwise, informed consent cannot be given.

And Mozilla should not be the thief of informed consent.