Acceptable Ads is bullshit on many levels:

• It’s made by an ad company
• The same ad company runs multiple popular ad blockers (including AdBlock Plus)
• There are no standards on privacy invasion

uBlock Origin, or at least uBlock Origin Lite on Chromium-like browsers, are must-haves.

The best browser you can set up for a family member, IMO, is Firefox. Disable Telemetry (which should rid them of Mozilla’s own ad scheme too), install uBlock Origin, remind them to never call or trust any other tech support people who reach out to them, and maybe walk them through some scam baiting videos.

I’m still evaluating which Chrome-likes are best at actual ad blocking, and the landscape is grim.

…For now. Looks like they’re going to get rid of it too (which makes sense, because they copy Chromium’s codebase).

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/extensions-chromium/developer-guide/manifest-v3

I think that’s the point: Google has been shutting down Manifest V2 extensions one step at a time, and it’s been experimenting with anti-ad-block tech on YouTube with one user group at a time.

disingeneous to call it adding ads

Who called it adding

With all due respect, Mozilla is now (and, for a while, has been) an ad company. When an ad company tells you ads are necessary, you should not trust them. Plenty of lousy things have been entrenched as social norms, but it is the job of the entrenchers to justify their existence… Which Mozilla is definitely not doing here.

A for-profit that wrapped itself in a non-profit shell that is empty and just run by the for-profit?

deleted by creator

I have carefully considered the arguments. Perhaps I have even contributed to them indirectly. I find them to be incredibly legitimate and in dire need of Mozilla’s action.

I’m kind of surprised your comment on this post got so much attention because it says so little; it should be dismissed out of hand as purely rhetorical IMO.

She switched places with another CEO that promptly fired even more workers, yes.

Can you link to your critiques? I looked for them on your behalf and found three other posts of this video, but no comments from you on them.

Criticizing this video for emotional arguments doesn’t make sense. It lays down statistics, quotes privacy policies, and chips at the way Mozilla uses emotional arguments in its marketing. And I’ve seen many Firefox people simply argue “the CEO deserves to be paid well” and “Firefox is the last bastion of the open web” - arguments that I myself have at least semi agreed with, which means I might have proclivity to emotion myself.

So if there’s a problem… Can you cite specific examples in the video?

Brave can keep the old APIs but they’ll still be affected, because developers for Chromium-compatible browsers still have to decide whether they want to create or support apps that will only work in a subset of browsers, and figure out how to distribute them outside the Chromium store.

TIL the things to build a browser take up less space than a package manager… But I don’t do Linux any more hardcore than Ubuntu either

Corrupt politicians can simply ignore the law. If they didn’t ignore it, they wouldn’t be very corrupt.

Telegram hasn’t been secure since basically day 1. IIRC it went something like

Security experts: Never roll your own cryptography.
Telegram: We rolled our own cryptography!
Security experts: Don’t. And it’s broken.
Telegram: uhhhh… We fixed it.
Security experts: It still looks really bad. Stop it.
Telegram: says nothing

I want Mozilla to make a browser that preserves privacy. They keep making it worse. And I don’t see how giving them money is helping them improve.

And my comment won’t cost them any money either, as @Matt@lemdro.id pointed out:

Plus donations to Mozilla cannot even be used for Firefox development due to the structure of the foundation and corporation.

I don’t think Mozilla should be deprived of money, and Firefox (or a lightly modified fork like Librewolf) is and probably always will be my default browser… But they’re getting plenty of money from elsewhere, so they probably don’t need ours.

I would encourage people to withhold donations from Mozilla. They have plenty of money rolling in, and in the past year they used it to overpay their CEO disproportionately, and to buy an AdTech company with private data that they sell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker#Negative_salary-performance_correlation

https://www.fakespot.com/privacy-policy (search “personal information is sold”)

Just imagine how much public good could be done if the professionals designing advertisements for maximum mental hijacking for corporate enrichment were doing something good for society, like providing therapy.