this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
37 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy Guides

16664 readers
11 users here now

In the digital age, protecting your personal information might seem like an impossible task. We’re here to help.

This is a community for sharing news about privacy, posting information about cool privacy tools and services, and getting advice about your privacy journey.


You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:

Learn more...


Check out our website at privacyguides.org before asking your questions here. We've tried answering the common questions and recommendations there!

Want to get involved? The website is open-source on GitHub, and your help would be appreciated!


This community is the "official" Privacy Guides community on Lemmy, which can be verified here. Other "Privacy Guides" communities on other Lemmy servers are not moderated by this team or associated with the website.


Moderation Rules:

  1. We prefer posting about open-source software whenever possible.
  2. This is not the place for self-promotion if you are not listed on privacyguides.org. If you want to be listed, make a suggestion on our forum first.
  3. No soliciting engagement: Don't ask for upvotes, follows, etc.
  4. Surveys, Fundraising, and Petitions must be pre-approved by the mod team.
  5. Be civil, no violence, hate speech. Assume people here are posting in good faith.
  6. Don't repost topics which have already been covered here.
  7. News posts must be related to privacy and security, and your post title must match the article headline exactly. Do not editorialize titles, you can post your opinions in the post body or a comment.
  8. Memes/images/video posts that could be summarized as text explanations should not be posted. Infographics and conference talks from reputable sources are acceptable.
  9. No help vampires: This is not a tech support subreddit, don't abuse our community's willingness to help. Questions related to privacy, security or privacy/security related software and their configurations are acceptable.
  10. No misinformation: Extraordinary claims must be matched with evidence.
  11. Do not post about VPNs or cryptocurrencies which are not listed on privacyguides.org. See Rule 2 for info on adding new recommendations to the website.
  12. General guides or software lists are not permitted. Original sources and research about specific topics are allowed as long as they are high quality and factual. We are not providing a platform for poorly-vetted, out-of-date or conflicting recommendations.

Additional Resources:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

@privacyguides collaborators, it’s time to review the recommendation of Firefox as a good browser option…

From: @sarahjamielewis
https://mastodon.social/@sarahjamielewis/113245689258934184

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 30 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I fully understand this to be a controversial take, but I think it is important to acknowledge that not all advertisement is the same. While I dislike all forms of advertisement, I only take issue with non ethical ones, which are based on surveillance. I don't have any ethical concern with contextual advertisement which is how some search engines provide advertisement, such as giving advertisement for food when searching for food.

But it is also critically important that extensions remain a part of the browser, to give a certain level of control to the person navigating the web instead of just allowing any website to freely track our activities.

I don't know what the path forward is for Mozilla. Google is unlikely to be able to fund Mozilla the way it has until now as a recent ruling which has deemed google as a monopolistic actor clawing at its default status everywhere it can. This was a major founding source for Mozilla. They need to figure out financing and while it is easy to criticize, we must also recognize the challenge it is to give sustainable and important funding sources to Mozilla. I really wish I had an answer... Can it somehow depend exclusively on its users for donations? Should It sell support services? Should it branch into more lucrative areas? If yes, which ones? It may need to be a combination thereof but for now, I'm personally blinded. We need to get together on this, because if we can't help Mozilla, can we help anyone who might fall into this situation?

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 22 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Fuck advertisers at this point.

Maybe in 1999 I was still with you, but they've continually shown, not just disregard for out concerns, but a flat out "fuck you" malicious adversarialism.

So fuck all advertisers at this point. Every fucking last one of them.

I will block them every way I can. I will poison their tracking. I will do everything I can to fuck with them.

Don't be an apologist for their bullshit.

And if you bring up the "well websites will cost you then". That's a whole lotta not my problem. If you want to host a server, that's your problem how to pay for it.

I currently pay for my internet, and you want me to subsidize your ads by paying my ISP to deliver those ads.

I also pay for my own VPS, and related services, for stuff I want to do, such as provide some services to family and friends. Should I serve ads to them to subsidize my server costs?

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

I don't think there's a reality where advertising disappears entirely. However I do think there is one where advertising is simply less-invasive, which is what companies like Mozilla, Brave, and Ad Nauseum advocate for.

[–] bakedprivacy@closednetwork.social 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] bakedprivacy@closednetwork.social 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

@helenslunch that's what Mozilla is doing with their "less intrusive advertising" they're tracking their users at the same time.

"Mozilla has enabled a so-called privacy preserving attribution (PPA) feature that turned the browser into a tracking tool for websites without directly telling its users."

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

Not really. The browser is tracking the user. All user activity remains local in the browser.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 0 points 6 days ago (2 children)

When a user interacts with an ad or advertiser, a record of that interaction is... sent to two independently operated services.

https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2024/08/22/ppa-update/

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ah, it's just google's privacy sandbox. Which imo is worse than straight up tracking everything on their end. It puts people at serious risk

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Basically. Insultingly, it was built alongside, and in some collaborative measure with, Google. (A bunch of companies bigger than Mozilla, and a bunch of ad networks, are all teaming up for the PATCG).

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 2 points 5 days ago

Oh, that's disappointing. I will be looking further into that. Thank you!

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You just intentionally omitted a bunch of pertinent information...

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You said

All user activity remains local in the browser

The pertinent information is that you were incorrect. That should be a big enough red flag for you to reevaluate how safe and secure you think PPA is.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I was not. What is transmitted is not user activity. It's all there in your link.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

You:

What is transmitted is not user activity.

Mozilla:

When a user interacts with an ad or advertiser, a record of that interaction...

User interactions are not user activities to you?

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago

The browser should not be aiding it, regardless of how nice it acts. The most important extensions - by a fucking mile - are ad-blockers. They represent a crystal clear separation of websites delivering data versus what the user chooses to do with it. All threats to that distinction are a foot in the door for losing control of how your computer does what you want.

Quite frankly Mozilla's been an obstacle to Firefox for many years. I don't trust them and I don't like them. This is yet another desperate pivot that squanders some of their vanishing goodwill and market share.

[–] Schlemmy@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago

Agreed. Nothing wrong with contextual advertising.

And if they succeed at their goal than maybe, one day, we can finally get wrid of those horrible cookie banners.

Just linking the blog post for reference:https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/improving-online-advertising/

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

If a company is unethical, they will ignore the Mozilla standard. If a company is ethical, they don't need the Mozilla standard, as they can adopt their own tracking-free methods of serving ads.

I have been told repeatedly by Firefox advertisement advocates that PPA only affects people that don't use ad blockers, so it allegedly only affects people that are already blasted by tracking networks to the fullest extent possible, while people who use ad blockers wouldn't see the supposedly less invasive ads anyway. So it's either 100% tracking to 110% tracking, or 0% tracking to 0% tracking. Seems like a lose-lose scenario for both sides of the equation.