> if "non-technical end-users" can't understand and go through them; they may be better leaving them alone.
I understand this reasoning, but I think the pendulum has swung too far from end-user control to a patronizing attitude where we tell users what is good for them - in fact, we decide for them without even telling them.
For example, in this case perhaps some users value confidentiality over system integrity or over performance; Mozilla doesn't empower them to make that decision; the users don't even know that a decision has been made. Mozilla could facillitate end-user control by making the options safe and by explaining them clearly.
There is a balance of course, and I'm just using this issue as a example - it's hardly the most critical.
Turning Firefox into Config Simulator 2016 would just alienate nontechnical users, not empower them.
I don't see how it's patronizing to say, "You can set this the way you want if you care, and people who don't care aren't faced with a bunch of choices they don't want."
I understand this reasoning, but I think the pendulum has swung too far from end-user control to a patronizing attitude where we tell users what is good for them - in fact, we decide for them without even telling them.
For example, in this case perhaps some users value confidentiality over system integrity or over performance; Mozilla doesn't empower them to make that decision; the users don't even know that a decision has been made. Mozilla could facillitate end-user control by making the options safe and by explaining them clearly.
There is a balance of course, and I'm just using this issue as a example - it's hardly the most critical.