I think Mozilla's heart was in the right place here, but pretty disappointing that they didn't vet their partner more thoroughly than what some GMU grad students were able to uncover.
Also makes me wonder what other shady connections fellow services might have, waiting to be uncovered. Looking at you, popular podcast sponsor, DeleteMe!
> Also makes me wonder what other shady connections fellow services might have, waiting to be uncovered.
This is why it's so important to require disclosure of beneficial owners for all companies. The world is filled with people that will poison you just so they can sell you an antidote, or, better yet, life long treatment.
"Puzzling" is a good description of just about every business decision Mozilla has made over at least the last decade.
People complain about the Google search deal and I get why, but I've been using the browser since back when it was called Phoenix, and at this point I'm pretty sure the Google deal is the only reason it's still alive. The engineering is still solid; its stewardship seems anything but.
With respect to Kanary, I have my entire family the platform and it's drastically reduced the amount of garbage (figurative) that comes through our door. Needed help with something non-standard the CEO personally took care of things while learning more about our specific use case.
> pretty disappointing that they didn't vet their partner more thoroughly than what some GMU grad students were able to uncover
What did it take for them to uncover it?
Generally speaking, GMU grad students may have have more time and plenty of expertise. When those grad students leave school and get jobs at Mozilla, they may be too busy to go down rabbit holes looking for long shots.
Co-founder DeleteMe here. Been building and delivering privacy tools and chatting on HN for 15 years. Happy to answer questions but please easy on unfounded accusations :)
I assume you're referring to the default search engine deal? What influence does that have on Firefox's privacy features? How does it make Firefox not a "privacy browser"?
Why would it? Harvesting data is not even Google's entire revenue, and Google would be phenomenally stupid to mess with Firefox, because if that would get out it's major anti-trust headaches waiting to happen.
What specifically did this influence, or is likely to be influenced? What specifically is made worse by this?
There's always these vague accusations, but never any specifics.
By default, Firefox makes it real easy to uniquely identify and track you, refuses to block ads and apparently, don't care much about marketshare. Wonder why?
Details are readily available if you know how to search.
Any browser makes it easy to track you because that's how the web works and it's hard to fully prevent without significantly affecting compatibility and/or feature set. Firefox does have some "Enhanced Tracking Protection" features for this though. And (extensively) changing the content of webpages by default would be inappropriate for a mainstream browser; it's not their job to curate what you see, and this includes ads (for starters, it's not so easy to even classify what an "ad" is).
These are just more vague accusations, and just as unencumbered by any evidence as your previous vague accusations were.
What a boring "gotcha". By that measure a browser should also allow any HTTPS certificate, self-signed or expired, and any other invalid certificate, and allow unrestricted unlimited access to all storage and all features. Oh no, that would be idiotic... Just as silly as conflating not implementing a technical feature or basic safety protections with "curation".
Hey your email provider also shouldn't do curation either, then why does it have a spam filter?!?! Checkmate atheists!
And that is because of Googles influence on Firefox, how?
You are not engaging with anything I said. I asked for evidence of Google's control over Firefox beyond "they have a search engine deal", and you seem unwilling or unable to provide it. Therefore I can only assume it does not exist and are simply making spurious claims for which no evidence exists.
Almost all their revenue comes from Goggle and you demand evidence that this influences them? How could it do otherwise?
The lack of default privacy and ad blocking in Firefox is the evidence.
The fact that Google continues to pay even as Firefox marketshare shrinks to irrelevance is evidence.
The more pertinent question for potential users is evidence that it does not influence tbem. By any reasonable measure, default Firefox is not "the privacy browser".
Also makes me wonder what other shady connections fellow services might have, waiting to be uncovered. Looking at you, popular podcast sponsor, DeleteMe!