This is not a good look, but neither is all the entitled outrage it’s provoking. Nobody owes us Firefox. It costs money to produce and maintain software, and a web browser is the most complicated software there is. Obviously Mozilla has made mistakes but it’s also holding the fort against a complete corporate takeover of the internet. Switching to LibreWolf is a quick fix, it’s not a sustainable solution. Volunteers alone will never have the organization or resources to maintain a world-class web browser. We are going to need to help Mozilla find a better way to viability.
If only they would offer the chance to opt out of this against a reasonable subscription fee, I personally would jump at that chance.
what the fuck is that last review comment?
What did it say?
it was removed? thank fuck. it was something like
surprised it took them this long. <insane slur for women> ruin everything they touch.
the slur was...
“front holes”
They add this line earlier in the code:
Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.
Seriously, do better and stop needlessly shaming Mozilla.
[edit] Read the replies to my message. There is good insight. Im probably very wrong here. Leaving my comment intact for context.
Did you read anything else in that PR? Explain why every other mention of them never selling your data has been marked as obsolete come 25th of April? Changing things like
Super free, actually. No hidden costs or anything. You don’t pay anything to use it, and we don’t sell your personal data.
to
Super free, actually. No hidden costs or anything. You don’t pay anything to use it.
# Obsolete string (expires 25-04-2025) nope-never-have = Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. { -brand-name-firefox } products are designed to protect your privacy. <a href="{ $url }">That’s a promise.</a>So much for that promise. Companies aren’t your friend.
Companies aren’t your friend.
I know Mozilla has been under fire for not being truly non-profit, but it is a corp fully owned by a non-profit. Are there any billionaires in Mozilla?
Also (completely basing on your comment btw, “every other mention”), if there is still one mention of it in the ToS the policy doesn’t seem to have really changed? Just a change in emphasis.
The current CEO is an Airbnb shill. Further, OpenAI is a non-profit, so I don’t really see what difference that makes. If the ToU isn’t changing, then why is there a flag labelled
tou-changed? Further, like I said, all the other mentions are being scrubbed, doesn’t that just further indicate that they are in fact changing it?Read the PR, the proof is right there.
{% if switch('firefox-tou') %} <p>Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.</p> {% else %} <p>Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.</p> {% endif %}Top paragraph is what they’re changing it to (behind a feature flag) and bottom is what it currently is. i.e. they are REMOVING the bit you marked in bold in your quote when the new ToS is active.
My dude, its being changed to add an additional paragraph. It is not being removed.
The diff shows that the single paragraph has been replaced with an if/else clause. If
switch('firefox-tou')evaluates to true, then the paragraph without the “We don’t sell access to your data” is rendered, if it evaluates to false, then the same paragraph with that particular sentence remains intact. Ergo, they’ve not added an extra paragraph.Whoever posted this probably extrapolated that it’s likely that Mozilla will change their Terms of Use, because that’s 100% what this looks like. They’ll probably announce their new ToU and flip a switch in the back-end and then when we navigate to this particular page we’ll see the paragraph that doesn’t have the “we won’t sell your data” instead.
TLDR; Mozilla is gearing up to sell your data. Get mad. Seriously, get mad because that’s fucking unacceptable.
That particular snippet is being changed so there’s a conditional for testing – if you toggle to show how it will be when the new ToS is active, it shows the version of the paragraph WITHOUT “Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data.” otherwise it shows the old text (i.e. exact same text in the paragraph in red).
Also, note the references to
# Obsolete string (expires 25-04-2025)where selling personal data is mentioned elsewhere – and the entirely removed FAQ entry!This is serious.
My dude, there is no “extra” paragraph in there. There is a conditional statement that says:
if (this_flag_is_set) { // [show this paragraph where we remove any mention of us not selling your data] } else { // [show this paragraph where we mention that we don't sell your data] }So it’s an “either/or,” not a “plus.”
It wasn’t “removed”, which was what I was responding to.
