this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2022
61 points (98.4% liked)

Memes

45643 readers
1195 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (14 children)

Ads are not the problem, the problem is the surveillance advertizing as buisiness model, that means that the company log the userdata and activity to sell it to advertising companies. That is how Mozilla make money, Brave make money with selective adblocking with associate cryptocompanies (I don't know if this is better), Vivaldi make money with default bookmarks and search engines from sponsors, which pay when the user use these, but the user is free to delete these, if not. Apart by donations and a merch store., they don't use any ads or trackers.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago (13 children)

Again, I don't know where you get the information from that Mozilla makes money off of surveillance. For many years now, they've had the problem that they're overly reliant on Google, but from the search engine deal, not advertisements. See, for example, this article: https://www.zdnet.com/article/googles-back-its-firefoxs-default-search-engine-again-after-mozilla-ends-yahoo-deal/

They have tried to gain a foothold in advertising to reduce that dependence on Google, but that was always privacy-friendly advertising.

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (12 children)

I do not trust so much what they say or what they put in the posts, if the Mozilla.com analytics shows me Google trackers and fingerprinting to put personalized ads, which implies the monitoring of user activity, yes or yes.

See the screenshot or test it by yourself

I use FF as second browser for some tasks, without account or sync, but I prefer to use a browser without any of this Google crap, which in FF isn't given, even if it is minimal compared to other browsers.

[–] IngrownMink4@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Your beloved Vivaldi blocks absolutely nothing with its adblocker by default. It's one of the worst browsers to protect the user's privacy. I admire Vivaldi for being against cryptocurrencies and for their alliances with products that are private and trustworthy, but your fanaticism disgusts me.

And I find it very hypocritical of you to blame Mozilla for including 1 tracker on their website, when Vivaldi is proprietary software and they include a whitelist for their weak adblocker to satisfy their partners. Also, their UI is written in Node.js, that's what makes it so slow compared to Brave and Firefox.

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Vivaldi ad and trackerblocker is customizable, you can it easy reforce with the filter you want in the settings. By default use the same filters as uBO.

[–] IngrownMink4@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Vivaldi's adblocker lacks cosmetic filtering aka element blocking. Advanced features like JavaScript blocking, web logger, are not available in the browser's built-in blocker. And some websites detect their native adblocker, and prevents you from accessing the website without disabling the feature. Not a good implementation IMO. Also, it's written on C++ (a memory unsafe language).

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Well, test your system how private it is https://www.deviceinfo.me

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)