this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
57 points (75.7% liked)

Technology

34883 readers
16 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Despite its emphasis on protecting privacy, Mozilla is moving towards integrating ads, backed by new infrastructure from their acquisition of Anonym. They claim this will maintain a balance between user control and online ad economics, using privacy-preserving tech. However, this shift appears to contradict Mozilla's earlier stance of protecting users from invasive advertising practices, and it signals a change in their priorities.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 66 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not interested in my computer striking a balance between my needs and the needs of people seeking to manipulate me into buying things.

I paid for my computer, it serves my needs. Yes I do run Linux, how did you guess?

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

But that isn’t the balance that’s being struck. Mozilla is trying to balance between useful services being available for free and people’s right to privacy. If you’re using any websites that has staff employed, they’re more likely than not being paid for by advertising.

[–] NotAnArdvark@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The model for most the content on the internet doesn't work without advertising. The people who are "zero tolerance" on ads are going to prevent possible compromises from being made and just encourage an arms race. I don't think we win that arms race, we get more insidious forms of tracking and brazen advertising.

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 1 points 1 month ago

Whatever compromise anyone tries to come up with will be ignored and exploited as hard as advertisers possibly can.

A compromise that actually works would depend on advertisers actually complying. The advertisers that do will be vastly outnumbered by the advertisers that don't.

So we're getting the arms race either way.

[–] savedbythezsh@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Honestly, despite the crypto, good on Brave browser for trying to subvert the advertising model by providing an actual monetization alternative

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What does this even mean? Brave didnt find something to "subvert the advertising model", they have a subscription lol. Mozilla is trying to keep its browser free and safe, especially now that it's losing its billion dollar google funding.

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

You haven't heard about the Brave ads that let you slowly accumulate tokens that you can then use to tip creators or websites? I'm not saying it was a good plan, or an ethical plan, but it was... You know, something.

Unlike what Mozilla did, Brave didn't enable this by default, but they heavily marketed it as a feature.

If Mozilla implemented some kind of tipping system, that could be interesting. Apparently, such a system already could exist under GNU Taler too.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

brave also used it to scam people by taking tips for creators who weren't on the platform. if the creator never signed up, they kept that money.

and they had an adblocker that replaced ads with their own, making the browser money instead of the site.

they have actively contributed to making the web worse. saying "at least they're doing something" is like praising the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of a mugger.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

You're 100% right about Brave being scummy.

And I hope my point didn't come across as a defensd of Brave, but rather, "how is it that Mozilla is doing this thing in a worse way than a company that is infamously disreputable?"

[–] savedbythezsh@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

Brave can make micro payments to content creators based on the number of views to the site, directly supporting content creators without ads or the need to join the patreon for each creator. It's a fully optional system, off by default but prompted upon opening the browser for the first time. It's a cool idea but they kind of spoiled it by making it be a crypto wallet with ads to earn the crypto.

Also, Brave doesn't have a subscription...?

[–] Fades@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] savedbythezsh@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Lol chill, I use Firefox. I can still call out good things in other browsers even if I don't like the browser as a whole for other reasons. None of what I said there was in support of chromium.