• theherk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I feel like I’m reading a different article than everyone else. The comments made me think the article would be adding advertisements, but it seems to be trying to find a way forward to facilitate advertisements while maintaining privacy.

    Without technical details I’m not sure that’s a bad thing. I know lemmy is largely “Mozilla bad”, but I’m just not sure the comments are in line with the proposal.

    • Bongles@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      30 minutes ago

      Yes, that’s the same thing every time Firefox is mentioned here. It’s like people here WANT to be angry.

    • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I originally was one of the “FUCK FIREFOX IS FUCKED” people. However, after taking a deep breath and actually reading, yes, you are correct. There is no indication that they’re blocking adblockers or taking away firefox customization. I think they’re both looking for alternative revenue streams and trying to make the advertising business less intrusive. That being said, their communication is absolute dogshit and they deserve a lot of the shit they get. But I am not yet panicking. Firefox remains the best choice for blocking ads.

      • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 minutes ago

        There is no indication that they’re blocking adblockers or taking away firefox customization.

        Yet.

        We don’t know that after they are deeper and deeper into the advertising industry, that they don’t just go ahead and do it.

        Remember how Google wasn’t always evil? Money changes companies (and people). Advertising money could very well change Mozilla. Plus, remember, these statements are them telling you the public version, things that they are claiming will happen. Often times what goes on behind the scenes is very different.

        I don’t think it’s unreasonable to be concerned by this.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The problem for me is that I’m tired of ads at all, so while I do think that having an ad system that is less abusive than the current one is a step in the right direction, I still don’t want to see any unsolicited ads and this feels like the initial steps to try to make it more palatable to eventually try to force users to accept ads back into their lives.

        • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Yea that’s likely what it is. Hopefully I can remain in the 1% of people who go out of their way to block ads. As long as I can do that I’ll welcome the industry as a whole being more privacy friendly (if that’s even possible)

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            57 minutes ago

            Yeah, that might be the best case scenario. Have ad blocking but add in some technical hurdles so that not enough people do it for it to be worth stamping out.

            Though that makes me wonder if this will be effective at all because the technical hurdle to get Mozilla’s new ad system is only slightly less than the technical hurdle to install ublock origin. I’m guessing advertisers will either ignore it entirely and continue with what they are doing (because the data means profit for them) or maybe put some portion of their bandwidth towards it while continuing to do what they are doing with other providers.