Vincent

joined 1 year ago
[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 1 day ago

I imagine part of the reason is that uBOL's target audience might have less of a problem with not getting it via AMO? After all, it probably wouldn't even exist if Chrome didn't pull its MV3 shenanigans.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 151 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

Appears to be a mistake, but needs gorhill to appeal to make the reviewer aware of the mistake and to be able to fix it, which he doesn't feel like doing because he thinks it's unlikely to have been a mistake.

Update: now reversed, but gorhill removed it himself just to not have to deal with the review process and the possibility of human error anymore.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 4 days ago

And they're cornering several markets, e.g. also the browser markets, which if we let them will make your adblocker no longer work either.

Don't use Chrome or Chrome-based browsers people. (So basically, use Firefox.)

(Yes there are a couple of others too. Do what you want, I'm not your boss.)

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 6 days ago

Yeah I was just elaborating on your point.

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

It's conspiratorial that Google gets ad clicks through Firefox, and pays Mozilla some of the money it makes from that?

And I suppose it's also conspiratorial to claim it's doing the same for Safari users - instead it's more likely that it's paying Apple 20 billion a year to remain out of the clutches of regulators?

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 18 points 1 week ago

Imagine if all the hours spent shitposting on Lemmy was spent on a single distribution.

The ways people enjoy spending their time are not interchangeable. Or in other words: https://fosstodon.org/@bragefuglseth/113183569977642462

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I mean, the extension system means we could easily fix it

If that's the case, then why not do it? Apparently the people who actually worked on X11 had a different idea, and so they decide not to do it themselves - but the code is right there for those who do think that that's a good approach.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Likewise, there are plenty of definitions of "better" that make Wayland a lot better. It's just that it's a lot of work to make something better, especially for some interpretations of "better".

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 3 points 1 week ago

The authentic French translation of forking.

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

And where did that Google money come from?

(It's a rhetorical question of course: it came from Firefox users clicking on ads.)

[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

How do you think Mozilla was funded before Fakespot and Anonym were acquired?

 

How do we improve JavaScript usage, teach progressive enhancement and reconcile the community?

 

An update on Mozilla's PPA experiment and how it protects user privacy while testing cutting edge technologies to improve the open web.

161
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by Vincent@feddit.nl to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
 

Copied from reddit:

Firefox CTO here.

There’s been a lot of discussion over the weekend about the origin trial for a private attribution prototype in Firefox 128. It’s clear in retrospect that we should have communicated more on this one, and so I wanted to take a minute to explain our thinking and clarify a few things. I figured I’d post this here on Reddit so it’s easy for folks to ask followup questions. I’ll do my best to address them, though I’ve got a busy week so it might take me a bit.

The Internet has become a massive web of surveillance, and doing something about it is a primary reason many of us are at Mozilla. Our historical approach to this problem has been to ship browser-based anti-tracking features designed to thwart the most common surveillance techniques. We have a pretty good track record with this approach, but it has two inherent limitations.

First, in the absence of alternatives, there are enormous economic incentives for advertisers to try to bypass these countermeasures, leading to a perpetual arms race that we may not win. Second, this approach only helps the people that choose to use Firefox, and we want to improve privacy for everyone.

This second point gets to a deeper problem with the way that privacy discourse has unfolded, which is the focus on choice and consent. Most users just accept the defaults they’re given, and framing the issue as one of individual responsibility is a great way to mollify savvy users while ensuring that most peoples’ privacy remains compromised. Cookie banners are a good example of where this thinking ends up.

Whatever opinion you may have of advertising as an economic model, it’s a powerful industry that’s not going to pack up and go away. A mechanism for advertisers to accomplish their goals in a way that did not entail gathering a bunch of personal data would be a profound improvement to the Internet we have today, and so we’ve invested a significant amount of technical effort into trying to figure it out.

The devil is in the details, and not everything that claims to be privacy-preserving actually is. We’ve published extensive analyses of how certain other proposals in this vein come up short. But rather than just taking shots, we’re also trying to design a system that actually meets the bar. We’ve been collaborating with Meta on this, because any successful mechanism will need to be actually useful to advertisers, and designing something that Mozilla and Meta are simultaneously happy with is a good indicator we’ve hit the mark.

This work has been underway for several years at the W3C’s PATCG, and is showing real promise. To inform that work, we’ve deployed an experimental prototype of this concept in Firefox 128 that is feature-wise quite bare-bones but uncompromising on the privacy front. The implementation uses a Multi-Party Computation (MPC) system called DAP/Prio (operated in partnership with ISRG) whose privacy properties have been vetted by some of the best cryptographers in the field. Feedback on the design is always welcome, but please show your work.

The prototype is temporary, restricted to a handful of test sites, and only works in Firefox. We expect it to be extremely low-volume, and its purpose is to inform the technical work in PATCG and make it more likely to succeed. It’s about measurement (aggregate counts of impressions and conversions) rather than targeting. It’s based on several years of ongoing research and standards work, and is unrelated to Anonym.

The privacy properties of this prototype are much stronger than even some garden variety features of the web platform, and unlike those of most other proposals in this space, meet our high bar for default behavior. There is a toggle to turn it off because some people object to advertising irrespective of the privacy properties, and we support people configuring their browser however they choose. That said, we consider modal consent dialogs to be a user-hostile distraction from better defaults, and do not believe such an experience would have been an improvement here.

Digital advertising is not going away, but the surveillance parts could actually go away if we get it right. A truly private attribution mechanism would make it viable for businesses to stop tracking people, and enable browsers and regulators to clamp down much more aggressively on those that continue to do so.

 

In this episode of Zed Decoded, Thorsten talks to Mikayla, who's been leading the effort to Zed working on Linux, about the Zed's Linux version and how it's taking shape

1
Puzzled (pbfcomics.com)
 

The launch of the digital euro could give every European a free, universal payment account. But this grand vision is at risk of being curtailed by a well-coordinated lobbying campaign of the banking industry. Banks want to make sure you will keep needing them – and they have EU officials’ ears.

 

In Hungary and other EU countries, tycoons close to the government control large parts of the press. For decades, the European Union has struggled to introduce measures to curb the power of media conglomerates. Documents obtained by Follow the Money reveal how, a quarter of a century ago, Europe’s most powerful politicians torpedoed an initiative that could have safeguarded media pluralism across Europe.

 

Israel's Supreme Court has struck down controversial judicial reforms that triggered nationwide protests last year against the Netanyahu government.

view more: next ›