
Firefox Offers Recommendations with Latest Test Pilot Experiment: Advance - Kemet
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2018/08/07/firefox-offers-recommendations-with-latest-test-pilot-experiment-advance/
======
kodablah
I'm confused about a couple of things. First, the tech. So my browsing history
is sent over the internet to a third party who comes up with recommendations
via some magic opaque system? Can some recommendations be prioritized by how
much you pay this third party? I have all sorts of questions about Laserlike's
use of the data, but I guess I can dig for myself. Sure, you can say "well,
don't use it" but this is more about the health of internet users in general,
not just me.

Second, the reasoning. Why? Is Mozilla altruistically trying to help people
find new things similar to what they're looking at on the internet? Is this
really a problem begging to be solved? What is the relationship with this
third party company Laserlike? Which way is money changing hands and how? How
do resources get allocated to projects like this as opposed to any other (i.e.
curious about prioritization)? From the outside looking in, it seems to have
little value, but of course that's why you test these things. It just seems
like a strange direction to put resources in.

I personally hope this experiment fails and people do not use their browsers
for webpage-like things such as recommendations. This is not the browser's
role and I'm becoming increasingly concerned at what larger companies think
the browser's role is vs little ole me. My only reason for not wanting it to
fail is I know that people put work into it.

~~~
callahad
Nick Nguyen's post on Context Graph¹ touches on the motivation, but in short,
we think the health of the Web is threatened by existing players building
experiences that, like a casino, you can link into easily, but which are
deliberately difficult to navigate away from. For example, Instagram has
historically restricted² which users are allowed to include external links in
their posts. That harms the Open Web and concentrates power over what you can
see and discover online.

On the other hand, if the _browser itself_ can offer links that break out of
those walls, then we can sidestep the existing filter bubbles and make the Web
a more competitive, plural medium.

Per the announcement post³, if this proves useful, we'll look at alternative
means of generating the recommendations; the current implementation (sharing
history) is an opt-in shortcut while we figure out if recommendations are
worth pursuing at all.

While we _are_ searching for privacy-respecting ways that we can diversify
Firefox's revenue, and recommendations could play into that, that's not what
this experiment is testing. Further, we will not pursue this outside of Test
Pilot if we can't do it in a way that's private and which adds genuine end-
user value.

¹: [https://medium.com/firefox-context-graph/context-graph-
its-t...](https://medium.com/firefox-context-graph/context-graph-its-time-to-
bring-context-back-to-the-web-a7542fe45cf3)

²: [https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/10/instagram-will-now-let-
cre...](https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/10/instagram-will-now-let-creators-add-
url-links-tag-friends-and-create-boomerangs-in-stories/)

³: [https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2018/08/07/firefox-offers-
reco...](https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2018/08/07/firefox-offers-
recommendations-with-latest-test-pilot-experiment-advance/)

~~~
basch
It just seems like something that can happen client side. Say there are deemed
100 new interesting articles in a day, send those 100 links to the client, and
let the client rank them.

Thats how the recommendation by pocket works, right? Whenever I see these
types of systems, I worry they try to hard to show us things more like our
past, and dont try hard enough to shape our future. A recommendation engine
should be more focused on "this is interesting, this is good for you to learn
about" in a healthy way, compared to "this is more of the same but we know
itll keep your attention better than facebook."

These AI recommendation engines ALWAYS fall too close to clickbait, like a
drug dealer, and never close to a medical healer, currated lists like
techmeme/mediagazer/longform/longreads/redef/aldaily. Prismatic and Trove come
to mind. I bet one could get better results just parsing those 6 sites for new
daily links.

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/78691781-c9b7-...](http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/78691781-c9b7-30a0-9a0a-3ff76e8bfe58)

~~~
taneq
> I worry they try to hard to show us things more like our past, and dont try
> hard enough to shape our future.

I really don't want some third party trying to "shape my future" by
influencing my browsing habits.

~~~
basch
I do. How do you get your news now? Google, facebook, some kind of feed
reader? This site youre on? Youre already being influenced.

What about the education system? You wouldnt go back to school if it was free?

The important part is that its either opt in, or very clear to opt out, and
that I can choose the organization I get my, for lack of a better word,
education from.

------
tapoxi
I don't get how this relates to Mozilla's mission, I especially don't
understand how technologies that are core to their mission (open communication
with Thunderbird, open identity with Persona) are left abandoned. I'm not
offended by the extension, I'm more befuddled why they're wasting their time
and money on something very few people want. My friends/social network are
going to suggest cool stuff to read, not some startup's bot reading by
browsing history.

Mozilla's mission is the reason people use Firefox. Chrome (and siblings) are
better supported by developers and have significantly better performance.
Mozilla's marketshare will continue to dwindle if they continue to invest
their time in projects like this.

~~~
smacktoward
The really mystifying part is that one of the key value propositions of
Firefox is "here is a browser that respects your privacy," and yet Mozilla
keeps flirting with bolting things on to Firefox that _actively undermine_
that value proposition. They repeatedly sabotage the success of their only
product! It's astounding.

~~~
megaman22
It's too much to hope that products could just focus on doing what they do,
and doing it well, rather than bodging on miscellaneous shit until it
resembles the Homermobile.

Build a browser. Implement the standards fully. Make it scream. That's your
job.

~~~
baq
so the thing is they're building a browser but they also care about having an
internet to browse on.

------
newscracker
When I started reading the article I thought this was an enhancement to Pocket
and that somehow, external data (context from other sites) downloaded
periodically combined with local browser history, would help the extension to
provide options on where to go next.

But later I understood that the browser history is sent to a machine learning
startup called Laserlike:

“At Mozilla, we believe browser history is sensitive information and we want
people to clearly understand that Laserlike will receive their web browsing
history before installing the experiment. We have also included controls so
that participants can pause the experiment, see what browser history Laserlike
has about them, or request deletion of that information.”

I certainly wouldn’t try this experiment out. Not because my browsing history
is scandalous in any way, but because it’s nobody else’s business to see what
I’m doing with my browser, when and where.

I do commend Mozilla for being transparent and also for doing such
experiments, even though as a privacy nut, I don’t see myself using this ever.

~~~
StavrosK
"We have also included controls so that participants can pause the experiment,
see what browser history Laserlike has about them, or request deletion of that
information.”

Where the hell _are_ these controls? Since I installed this thing before
reading that it'd send my data to some party, like an idiot, I'd like to
request deletion of the data now, but I can't for the life of me find any sort
of interface for it. What the fuck, Mozilla?

~~~
seren
So this is a violation of GDPR as well ?

~~~
GordonS
You have to consent to use this, and Mozilla tell you exactly what information
you are providing and what happens with it - how exactly does this violate the
GDPR?

------
fpgaminer
Let's talk about the knee-jerk reaction we are all probably having right now:
"Muh privacy!"

It's hard not to have that reaction. A couple days ago there was a front page
post on HN about the DNS-Over-HTTPS features that Mozilla is experimenting
with. Mozilla has this storied history of community reactions. So perhaps we
can all be forgiven for being on edge with Firefox. Our news feed makes it
seem like Mozilla is out to get you.

And yet, none of these stories ever end up bearing fruit. How often has
Mozilla _actually_ violated your privacy. When rubber meets the road, Firefox
is in many ways the most pro-user-privacy browser on the market.

Not to mention all the other work that Mozilla does. Common Voice
([https://voice.mozilla.org/en](https://voice.mozilla.org/en)) is an amazing
project that could completely change the game for user privacy in the IoT
industry. Let's Encrypt stepped up the level of encryption on the internet by
an order of magnitude, and it did so for free when everyone else was gouging
us. Rust is making many bugs a thing of the past, which will lead to far fewer
instances of user data being leaked by security bugs.

Yet through all this work that Mozilla does to fight _for_ you, they get shit
on by news articles and in these comment sections. Meanwhile Chrome, which we
_know_ is harvesting our data, gets no news.

Perhaps it is because we hold Mozilla to a higher standard. We are used to
Google's abuse with Chrome, so we don't talk about it. But any move by Mozilla
that could possibly be misconstrued as them becoming corrupt raises all our
alarms.

Or perhaps the Firefox team is simply struggling with PR. After all, these
last two news worthy incidences are really just issues with communication.
Firefox _isn't_ sending all your DNS queries and browsing history off into
wonderland. These are experiments. But it seems like a lot of people miss that
point. So maybe it's just a communication issue.

Or maybe this all has to do with Mozilla being open. When Google experiments,
they do so mostly in secret. Mozilla's transparency might be making them easy
targets for sloppy news.

Either way, my point is that a lot of us are happy to throw Mozilla under the
bus at the slightest hint of corruption, but we never take the time to
appreciate the good work they've done (for free, by the way).

~~~
ve55
Yes, Firefox is held to a higher standard of user privacy than Chrome. This is
how it should be given that Chrome is a product made by one of the largest
for-profit surveilliance and advertising companies that has ever existed.

Firefox has constantly violated my expectations of privacy in many ways, by
removing important features, adding tracking in many locations (including
Google Analytics on internal browser pages), and adding copious amounts of
worthless features that use dark patterns in order to convince the user to
hand over their data (Firefox accounts, Pocket, 'Take a Screenshot', many
more)

~~~
Vinnl
> This is how it should be

Well, that depends. What if the effect is that Firefox's market share
dwindles, it disappears, and everyone is forced to use e.g. Google's browser?
All of a sudden your higher standards have resulting in only being able to
choose lower standards...

------
conroy
Mozilla is such a confusing company, and I say this as a daily Firefox user.

How can you be claim to be serious about privacy when you partner with a
startup to harvest complete browser histories? Makes no sense.

------
dralley
Since there are a lot of more hyperbolic articles from "ghacks" and similar
ilk going around, I feel compelled to point out straight away that this is
explicitly opt-in.

You not only have to install the Test Pilot addon, which is not installed by
default, but you then have to enable the experiment.

The sky is not falling just because they're offering something like this
locked behind two separate opt-in steps.

~~~
crankylinuxuser
> I feel compelled to point out straight away that this is explicitly opt-in.

Now.

> The sky is not falling just because they're offering something like this
> locked behind two separate opt-in steps.

They did the same scam with Pocket. Now, tell me how to disable that again?

~~~
drb91
> Now, tell me how to disable that again?

You can disable it in about:config.

~~~
crankylinuxuser
extensions.pocket.enabled => FALSE

is what you're talking about, right?

Why the hell is a bloody plugin compiled in with a browser?! I should be able
to click "delete" on the plugin screen and purge this trashheap from my
system. I shouldn't have to use "hope and prayer" that a plugin isn't used.

Instead, I have to go traipsing in about:config. It's not even in preferences,
or plugins, or wherever.

~~~
icebraining
It's not a plugin, it's a browser feature, like bookmarks and the web
inspector.

~~~
drb91
The line between plugins and features is only useful if it's meaningful.
Pocket is, by every appearance, a bookmark service. Why is that integrated
into the browser? There's already Firefox Sync. It should be opt-in; I'm in
agreement here.

~~~
GordonS
I really like Pocket and use it all the time, but I still agree that it should
be offered as a plugin, rather than built-in to the browser.

------
mgbmtl
The important bit:

"[...] we want people to clearly understand that Laserlike will receive their
web browsing history before installing the experiment. We have also included
controls so that participants can pause the experiment, see what browser
history Laserlike has about them, or request deletion of that information."

So, this is basically a better Stumble Upon, where you can delete the data
they have on you.

How are they monetizing the service?

There is a complaint on the Apple App store that while you can delete your
history, you may not be able to delete your account:
[https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/laserlike-search-
discover/id...](https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/laserlike-search-
discover/id1246441938?mt=8)

~~~
autoexec
I never trust that I can delete my collected data from anyone.

At the point you hit the delete button your data has likely already been
spread around to backups (including offline/offsite), been aggregated with
other's data, shared with "partners" and sold to other companies and data
brokers. The idea that a "delete" button can somehow undo all of that and keep
your data out of others hands is absurd.

~~~
russdpale
Exactly. And there is nothing that verifies anythong gets deleted anyways. It
could always just tell you it deleted it while never deleting anything.

------
michaelgv
I’d be open to this if it was built in Firefox and let you run the models on
your own machine instead of blindly trusting a third party.

~~~
dblohm7
It sounds like you would prefer Pocket Recommendations then, as that is
exactly how it works.

------
sanbor
I don't like this kind of features. I understand that the rationale behind
sites like Youtube is to feed you more content to be able to show you more
ads, but I see it as a DoS attack to my productivity. Curiously, Google is
starting to implement "Wellbeing" on Android to cut so many distractions.

I have commented this a couple of times already. I would like Mozilla to focus
on fundamental things for a web browser like a good print dialog or syncing
your search engines.

------
narkee
Reminds me a lot of StumbleUpon, which coincidentally, just shut down this
year (June 30 2018).

------
seren
Is it an accident that Advance starts with Ad ?

I don't think so.

The screenshot with the top100 restaurants exactly looks like an ad placement.
It is probably not bad that Mozilla gets other source of income, but please
call a spade a spade.

~~~
jeltz
Haha, so many adtech companies start with ad- that is hard not to make that
connection.

------
cJ0th
If you allow me to put on my red hat (when was the last time you heard someone
say that ?) then I have to say that this feels like typical PR speak where the
opposite is closer to the truth than the actual statement.

------
dgllghr
If the privacy settings are right for this, I'm very excited. This is exactly
the kind of feature I would like to use but don't because it involves sharing
so much of my browsing.

~~~
cujo
Looks like there is no privacy. They either get everything and you get the
service, or you disable it.

I know it says you can "request" info get deleted, but I'm not going to bet a
quarter on that working.

~~~
michaelgv
I imagine that when you request data deleted it’s only anonymized, and the
actual learning data is kept.

------
putlake
We are at a time in history when we could benefit from reading _alternative_
points of view rather than remain trapped in our ideological bubbles.

------
O2F2
This can not realistically end up as a addon and also will not gain any
traction as opt-in option, it needs to be opt-out. So it's either going to be
abandoned or end up baked in.

So, unless a considerable part of the userbase is "throwing a tantrum", this
will be yet another thing I have to remember to turn off on fresh installs.

Not fighting this kind of erosion tooth and nail at every step endangers the
only viable, fully featured, alternative to the Googles browser. Yes, Mozilla
_needs_ to be held to a higher standard, the alternative is the inversion of
what it stands for.

I have honestly no idea how one can look at this and go _yeah, that seems like
its in tune with our values_.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
The next question that follows is "who at Mozilla instigated this and why?".
The mindset at Mozilla seems to have changed somewhat.

------
htor
i can't help but feel disappointed about mozilla proposing to have
advertisement mechanisms built right into their browser. there's a blurry line
between suggestions and plain advertisement. as a user online i don't _need_
more relevant information. this is just marketing people baloney to make
people buy more stuff.

------
Hello71
"Firefox integrating targeted sidebar ads based on selling complete browser
history".

