
Suggested sites in Firefox based on browsing history - srathi
https://blog.mozilla.org/advancingcontent/2015/05/21/providing-a-valuable-platform-for-advertisers-content-publishers-and-users/
======
codemac
Ah fuck.
[https://blog.mozilla.org/advancingcontent/files/2015/05/How-...](https://blog.mozilla.org/advancingcontent/files/2015/05/How-
data-is-protected-Infographic1.pdf)

In that diagram, I imagine my history, IP, etc getting compromised at every
arrow location. Dammit. Mozilla had been doing so well when it came to
freedom.

~~~
derpsss
> Final tiles decisioning happens within Firefox

> Aggregate totals reported:

> locations (country)

> times displayed

> pins/blocks

> clicks

> no personal data is shared!

The actual fuck are you talking about?

------
tombrossman
"Providing a Valuable Platform for Advertisers, Content Publishers, and Users"
Sure does say a lot about their priorities here, doesn't it? First come
advertisers, then publishers, then in last place are the users. This is the
message I'm getting.

------
CarloSanta4
This is serious. My browsing history is private. I neither want Google nor
Mozilla to sell it to companies which in turn use it to control markets and
make me pay more for products. I can't prevent all the stuff Google is doing,
but I can prevent Mozilla from accessing my private data.

Well, goodby Firefox, it's been a pleasure for the last 10+ years.

------
mechazawa
This feature does not sound promising to privacy minded users. I understand
that Mozilla needs money to operate but this will drive away a lot of people.
Most average users won't mind this kind of behavior though. A simple pop-up
once you update/install Firefox saying something like "Would you like to turn
on interest based tiles?" should do the trick. Either that or a separate build
of Firefox (dev edition?).

I'm a strong opponent when it comes to sharing more then needed. Sharing my
browser history and behavior with a 3rd/2nd party is sharing way more then
necessary.

------
pdkl95
Between this an putting DRM into firefox, Mozilla seems to be channeling
Neville Chamberlain:

    
    
        "My good friends, for the second time this week, a *Mozilla team member*
         has returned from *Content Services* bringing *privacy* with *"tailored ads"*.
    
         I believe it is *privacy* for our time...
    
         Go home and get a nice quiet sleep."
    

Appeasement just cost them them a lot of support. Unfortunately, this was
probably inevitable, given that Mozilla was firmly in the "Open Source" camp.
A lot of people like to complain about the strict ideological rigidity of RMS
and the FSF. As we see here, without the foundation that is focused on the
Free (as in speech) ideals and putting the user first, the 'pragmatic"
decisions of Open Source allow it to be captured by popular faction.

The problem with this situation isn't ads. It isn't even the obvious privacy
issues that end up being lampshaded with promises of anymization and servers
that never get hacked or changed in future updates. The really damning thing
about putting ads into Firefox is the conflicting incentives it introduces.
Previously, Mozilla just had a cache problem. Now they have a slightly smaller
cache problem and are financially dependent on advertisers.

When (not if) those advertisers request something more intrusive, is Mozilla
prepared to give up that income source to protect their users? No, that's the
problem with paying the Dane-geld[1] - you never get rid of the Dane.

[1]
[http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/dane_geld.html](http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/dane_geld.html)

------
fabulist
Mozilla needs money to function; this is true. But I am deeply disappointed
that have resorted to this. I do not consider Chrome, Opera, Konqerour, or
Safari to be real options for my use case, but I don't want to use a Firefox
which spies on me. I don't know what I'm going to do about that.

Edit: reading further, there is clear effort to protect user's privacy. But
I'm still uneasy.

