Bas Schouten (@[email protected])
mastodon.social
@[email protected] Again, and as Bobby has explained at length here: https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1e43w7v/a_word_about_private_attribution_in_firefox/ This is making privacy a privilege for the people that work to inform and educate themselves on the topic. People shouldn't need to do that, everyone deserves a more private browser. Privacy features, in Firefox, are not meant to be opt-in. They need to be the default. If you are 'completely anti-ads' (i.e. even if their implementation is private), you probably use an ad blocker. So are unaffected by this.

Just wanted to surface this comment, because not enough people are cognizant of the fact that adblockers do their job and prevent any PPA submissions.

  • refalo@programming.dev
    111·
    5 months ago

    I think they believe it’s not anti-privacy, but a lesser of two evils.

    Mozilla/Firefox simply can’t exist without ads. Google same thing. So why would they actively contribute to their own demise by declaring war on ads?

    Instead they chose a compromise that still allows ads but in a more responsible/private way. And you can still turn it off. Sure it should have been opt-in, but I think most people wouldn’t use it then and we’re back to the same problems.