Firefox 128 introduces 'privacy-preserving ad measurement' and enables it by default. Here's how to disable this feature.
  • TootSweet@lemmy.worldEnglish
    403·
    4 months ago

    The world desperately needs more than just two browsers.

    To the point that I’ve literally started writing a browser from scratch.

    I may rage quit the moment I get 5 minutes into the layout engine. But we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it, lads and lassies and everyone else.

    (And, in practice, my intention is to make a really really simple layout engine and make it better later.)

    • Wiz@midwest.socialEnglish
      131·
      4 months ago

      The HTML is easy.

      I think the hard part is the JavaScript that runs on almost every website.

      • TootSweet@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        4 months ago

        I’ll definitely Open Source it under the AGPL 3.0 when or before it reaches the point of “minimum viable product.”

        Which basically means it can technically read see most of the content on the page of what you might consider a “Web 1.0” page. In that state, the layout will be effed, there won’t be any JS, Web Sockets, maybe not even animated GIFs. But you’ll be able to read Wikipedia. (Though, again, it won’t look like it does in Chrome or Firefox or even I.E. 6.0 .)

        And then the plan is to evolve it from there, prioritizing roughly the features that most improve the range of sites and features people can reasonably use even if they don’t work “like they do in Chrome/Firefox”.

        And if other folks get interested enough to throw labor at it, awesome. If not, hopefully something shiny doesn’t distract me and get me working on something else.

        And, mind you, I’ve been working on this for like two-ish weeks. So all I’ve got are some high-level requirements, design, some toy experiments to learn more about how the graphics part is going to work, and some of the infrastructure by which different parts/modules of the browser are going to communicate. There’s kindof nothing to show or update about yet.

        If you like, I’ll save your post and when there’s something to show (basically when it’s Open Sourced), I’ll DM you and let you know where the repo is. And you’ll be able to check there for further updates.

        And if anyone else wants updates, (and I can’t really promise anything is actually going to come of any of this), feel free to respond to this post.

        Oh, also, this might matter to some folks. I’m writing it in Go. Some folks might dislike that because it’s “a Google language.”

        • voracread@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          4 months ago

          I like the “release early, release often” approach. For a curious lay man like observing something from scratch is interesting. This will attract more eyes and eventually more programmers.

        • BroBot9000@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          4 months ago

          If you like, I’ll save your post and when there’s something to show (basically when it’s Open Sourced), I’ll DM you and let you know where the repo is. And you’ll be able to check there for further updates.

          Yeah do it! Would love to see how it progresses and help out with testing. Not a coder but can do graphic elements 2d/3d if you need a hand with those.

    • fin@sh.itjust.works
      42·
      4 months ago

      How about ladybird? They claim to be a “truly independent browser”. I like the idea of creating a new browser, btw

      • mke@lemmy.worldEnglish
        141·
        4 months ago

        Note that if you’re the kind of user who shuns Brave because the CEO says stupid shit, you’ll probably not look fondly upon Ladybird’s project lead and main developer being scared of pronouns.

        If you don’t care about that, it’s an interesting project. Can’t say I approve, though.

        Hard for me to get the link RN, I’ll add it soon.

        Edit: issue on github. Posting to inform people and let each one decide what to do on their own, just don’t harass anyone, please.

  • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
    221·
    4 months ago

    From what I read before, it seems like they’re at least anonymizing data, but as soon as I read that they’re working with Meta to standardize the approach, I winced hard. You can opt out of it at least.

    • mke@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7·
      4 months ago

      Don’t think it’s with Meta directly, but ex-meta folks now working as Anonym, which Mozilla recently acquired. I’ll check the announcement and docs again later, just in case I misread. I fully support criticizing dubious software and decisions, but I believe we need to do it properly, otherwise it’s just noise.

      Edit: really sorry folks, I got things mixed up.

      For the last few months we have been working with a team from Meta (formerly Facebook)
      source - mozilla blog

      But searching this did lead me to find out this is done in partnership with the ISRG

      Our DAP deployment is jointly run by Mozilla and ISRG.
      source - explainer on github

      Which is sponsored and partly led by the EFF—haven’t seen these folks miss horribly yet, though feel free to point out an example.

      …I almost made a lengthy argument here, but it wouldn’t be directed at anyone in this thread. Bit tired. My point is, lots of folks whose work I respect (even if begrudgingly) involved in this. I want to give it serious consideration, not throw it away because “fake privacy feature.” If it works and is widely adopted, I can see the argument for how it’d be better—unfortunately, most people still browse the internet without uBlock.

      Doesn’t mean I’ll stop installing uBlock on every device I can; I’m simply accepting that’ll never be every device on earth.

      • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
        7·
        4 months ago

        Mozilla is a little different too. They’ve been around for a long time and I get the vibe at least most of the folks there believe in something. They’re also are struggling to strike a balance between keeping the doors open, and not becoming a terrible monster like Google and Meta have become. I’ve been using their stuff for a long time.

        • mke@lemmy.world
          4·
          4 months ago

          Yeah, a hardline stance was never one of their core values. Every year I wonder, a little more unsure of my past ideals, if perhaps their balanced approach isn’t the more effective one in terms of actually getting things done and making the internet slightly better than it would’ve been otherwise.

          I do wish we had more browsers, though. Shame about Ladybird.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      95·
      4 months ago

      Because “anonymized” data can never be reversed.

      I mean the bullshit from these people…

      • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
        10·
        4 months ago

        The real solution is to never send that data at all. I don’t trust any company when they say they encrypt data, unless they have their approach reviewed by experts in the cryptographic field.

        Is it encrypted at rest or only in transit? What’s the encryption and the method? Where is the data stored?

        It’s like giving someone the keys to your house simply based on a promise they’ll never enter.

        Microsoft recently debuted their Recall feature and it was immediately found to have a major flaw in the security of the storage method for the files. These companies have proven they’re careless at every turn.

        • massacre@lemmy.worldEnglish
          21·
          4 months ago

          There ya go. I don’t want to be opted in to sending ANYTHING to Mozilla, especially advertisement effectiveness detail. I’m certain that’s going to include non-anonymized data or it’s mostly useless, I can’t see what’s being sent, but it may not be secured. I get it, I’m not the majority, with ublock and a pi-hole there’s not much to even go on before I made the config change. I guess it’s about time to move away from core firefox branch… but that comes with it’s own concerns.

      • Holli25@slrpnk.net
        21·
        4 months ago

        By definition, anonymized data can not be reversed. However, many people do not know that difference. If the data would really be anonymized, it would be fine from a data protection point of view.

      • mke@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        4 months ago

        I get your point, but also: Moz. acquired pocket and there’s still a flag to disable it. Almost every other privacy-affecting feature has either intuitive settings or about:config flags.

        This feels like an unfounded, or at least overblown, fear.

        Not that I appreciate pocket being integrated in the first place, but still.

  • SkavarSharraddas@gehirneimer.de
    12·
    4 months ago

    The question is, how much data? From their description it seems that it gives less data than conventional tracking. If you use an adblocker you won’t interact with ads anyway so there’s nothing to track either way. But if you don’t and this new method needs less data and still satisfies advertiser “needs” (wants), isn’t that a good thing?

    • brb@sh.itjust.works
      41·
      4 months ago

      It is. This is a good thing for people not using adblockers and a nothingburger for adblock users

  • Evotech@lemmy.world
    132·
    4 months ago

    I mean I get them, they don’t mind ads as that’s how 99.999% of the web is financed, but they don’t like getting tracked.

    I don’t like ads though

  • NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.worldEnglish
    10·
    4 months ago

    Opting out:

        Go to Settings (In the Menu bar click Firefox, select Preferences or Settings)
    In the Privacy & Security panel, find the Website Advertising Preferences section.
    Uncheck the box labeled Allow websites to perform privacy-preserving ad measurement.