Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Firefox Mozilla Open Source Privacy Software

Mozilla Updates Firefox With Forget Button, DuckDuckGo Search, and Ads 327

Posted by Soulskill from the onward-and-upward dept.
Krystalo writes: In addition to the debut of the Firefox Developer Edition, Mozilla today announced new features for its main Firefox browser. The company is launching a new Forget button in Firefox to help keep your browsing history private, adding DuckDuckGo as a search option, and rolling out its directory tiles advertising experiment.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla Updates Firefox With Forget Button, DuckDuckGo Search, and Ads More

Mozilla Updates Firefox With Forget Button, DuckDuckGo Search, and Ads

Comments Filter:

  • Bastards ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:20AM (#48356871)

    rolling out its directory tiles advertising experiment

    I sincerely hope this is optional.

    Not all of us are willing to accept ads. Especially not from the open source browser which is supposed to help be more private.

    • Re:Bastards ... (Score:4, Funny)

      by houstonbofh ( 602064 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:22AM (#48356883)
      Time to dust off the IceWeasel...

    • Re:Bastards ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by jeepies ( 3654153 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:34AM (#48356907)
      If you disable directory tiles on new tabs, the ads are also disabled.

      • You also need to disable the preloading and directory ping

    • Re:Bastards ... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @01:36AM (#48357139)

      Google stopped funding Firefox and started funding chrome.

      Google is an advertising Giant, Microsoft is an advertising Giant, both produce web browsers not to maximize utility but revenue.

      We're talking about one company that, in the IE4 days, ran windows update through IE and wondered why everyone caught viruses through it; to this day disgusting webbies are still making feature requests and design changes to the browser with exactly zero consideration for security. Chrome is the same exact thing. In the end, the end objective of advertisers is to run full-blown applications on your machine, and to do whatever the hell they want to it, and track every purchase and data-mine every action you take.

      And that makes them absolutely no different then the Russian Mob\Russian Hackers in that regard. This is the reason companies have started to install ad-blocking software at the firewall on back, and why users are installing Adblock. Not because the ad's are annoying, but because of the very, very real need to protect themselves. Cryptolocker wiped out tens of thousands of projects, and thousands of businesses; criminals were not prosecuted because files were encrypted on police file-shares, and people died because the same happened to hospitals. This is why Putin arrested everyone involved, and why the newer versions of it are not as virulent.

      Where did it come from? Yahoo's web advertising network. That one is well-documented.

      I've moved the majority of my users onto Seamonkey which has become a standard part of our deployment, adblock is implemented via GPO and is part of our NAC policy. Whenever users complain they can't get to site content because of it, I let the website owner know what we are using it and why, and if they complain my simple answer is "Are you going to pay for my time to re-image machines? No. Find a new revenue stream.". "Trust us our advertisers would never break your computer", and my answer to that is "Fuck you, fuck your website, fuck your mom, fuck your career, and again, fuck you. I will blacklist your ass on my firewall and tell my end user to find a new source before I allow your banner ad's in.".

      Now these Webbies have gotten into the standards documents, and browsers are doing things that really, they have no fucking business doing such as DRM'd Video in HTML5. The ONLY Reason you do that is you want a full-page video ad to pop up and take control of the browser for a minute. There's no other fucking reason for that; netflix can easily provide a separate app for streaming video. Why is your MAC address in your IP address in IPV6? The ONLY reason is to track the device from location to location, because it's super useful to be able to have persistence and serve ad's based upon what an IP last saw.

      The result of that is networking guru's have basically said "Fuck you we are using IPV4 internally until you give us a NAT RFC". They are engineers, not advertisers, they have no patience for bullshit, and if they want to go down this path, large networks are going to seek alternatives.

      Expect MS and Google to continue pushing back against the likes of ad-block with feature changes, and expect those feature changes are going to enable the next crypto-locker to hit, except this time it's going to do a lot more damage. Eventually these companies' monopoly positions will be challenged.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Monoman ( 8745 )

        AC + No references = Did not read.

    • Re:Bastards ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by dejanc ( 1528235 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @05:08AM (#48357747)
      It looks optional. I just updated and on directory tiles you get options: "Enhanced", "Classic" and "Blank". I don't see a difference between Enhanced and Classic but I am going to guess that Classic is ad free.

      Anyway, why be so negative about this? People at Mozilla provide a great browser and if that means you get to see some ads (that you can disable) every once in a while, what's the big deal? If they were injecting ads into pages you load, I would object, but seeing them on an otherwise empty page is as intrusive as default search engines they give you. Both things are perfectly fine.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

        It depends on the implementation. Ads are a popular malware delivery platform. Ads are often inappropriate or offensive. Sometimes they are animated or make noise. I don't know what the Mozilla ads are like, so I'll reserve judgement until I find out.

        • They're just the static tiles you get on a normal new tab page, except they're populated with sponsored sites until your browser history automatically replaces them. This isn't something that would even affect updating users, just fresh installs with an empty history.

      • The Mozilla Foundation needs revenue. If you're not willing to accept the ads, use another browser.

        The only alternative is for them to offer a paid proprietary ad-free version, and I'd rather see open source + ads than taking one of the most prominent open source software projects in the world and making it proprietary.
      • I have upgraded a few of my firefox installations (all with heavily customized profiles) and the tabs default to "Classic" mode. It looks like they disable the ads by default for existing installations.

  • Can't wait for this! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:27AM (#48356887)

    What is Firefox thinking? From the last paragraph in the article: "Firefox users should 'expect a lot more experimentation in advertising,' Mozilla Senior Engineering Manager Gavin Sharp told VentureBeat."

    • Re:Can't wait for this! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fustakrakich ( 1673220 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:32AM (#48356901) Journal

      Don't worry. There will be a lot more experimentation in ad blocking extensions.

    • Re:Can't wait for this! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by UltraZelda64 ( 2309504 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:47AM (#48356975)

      Mozilla should expect a lot more fleeing users with that attitude. I just just about ready to ditch their browser anyway, and they only keep making me want to do it more. The only problem is that the the competition--Chrome--sucks, and is single-handedly the reason Firefox's interface has sucked for the last few years. Ever since Google released the crap and Mozilla decided to make Firefox a carbon copy of it.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Give Pale Moon a try.

      • Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @03:20AM (#48357453)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • Re:Can't wait for this! (Score:4, Informative)

          by Luckyo ( 1726890 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @07:54AM (#48358395)

          FYI: They fixed a lot of broken stuff in 25.0.1 and 25.0.2. If you haven't done so, you may want to check if your specific qualms have been fixed.

          • Comment removed based on user account deletion

            • Re: (Score:3)

              by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

              Strange. I have no such problem with it. Adblock's "pseudo-static" version they have is simply adblock with one line of code changed to recognise palemoon's interface as acceptable. In fact, normal adblock works just fine on 25.0.x, the only problem is that it won't show interface elements on UI because it doesn't recognise PM's UI elements as FF elements. When I updated to 25.0.0, it blocked ads as usual, but I couldn't see the UI element.

              Did you perhaps install it on top of old adblock without removing it

              • Comment removed based on user account deletion

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

                  Very strange. I can't recall ever hearing of anyone having this problem. You may have been dealt a really bad RNG in there :(

                  I've tried the comodo dragon one, but it was just a reskinned chromium with some minor tweaks.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

          Midori is webkit based and pretty minimal: http://midori-browser.org/ [midori-browser.org]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Merk42 ( 1906718 )
        They'd probably be fine with that. Those kind of users are self-entitled whiners who believe people should work on Firefox completely for free because gimme. Also that work is always wrong because it's either a change and change is bad, or it's no change and that's also bad because then they're clearly just wasting their time.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by nmb3000 ( 741169 )

      What is Firefox thinking? From the last paragraph in the article: "Firefox users should 'expect a lot more experimentation in advertising,' Mozilla Senior Engineering Manager Gavin Sharp told VentureBeat."

      If you want to raise your blood pressure and really ruin your outlook of Firefox's future, go read some of Gavin Sharp's comments on various Bugzilla bugs. Seeing the justification for the removal of features and the addition of toxic features ruins my day every time I'm driving there to try and understand why something changed.

      Gavin and the others like him that simply want to turn Firefox into Mini-Chrome are the biggest threat to Firefox today.

    • they are thinking Google has them by the balls (Score:5, Insightful)

      by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @02:12AM (#48357267) Journal

      > What is Firefox thinking?

      I suspect they are thinking that it sure was nice to have Google paying them millions of dollars for so long, but with Chrome already having twice as many users, Google won't need to keep doing that. They've built an organization that has expenses in the hundreds of millions. Close to 90% of that is for using Google as the default search. Right now, Google has the power to make the Mozilla foundation vanish. That means, of course, that Google can exercise power over them just by a vague threat, or even simply expressing displeasure with a Mozilla decision.

      Each November the foundation releases their financial statement. When preparing this financial statement and the last one, they must have seen that the reliance on Google is a problem. They made some small deals with other companies, like including Bing as an _option_ users can set as their default search, but the other deals don't come close to covering their expenses. So to stop being completely reliant on Google, they need some other revenue stream. Somebody sketched a proposal for how they could run ads in a fairly unobtrusive way, in a way that doesn't seem sneaky or underhanded, and that revenue could cover their expenses.

      I don't want ads in my browser. I think clumsily adding ads to Firefox could backfire in a huge way. I also think it would be stupid for the Firefox devs to NOT be looking at clever ways to include fairly acceptable ads, new ideas on how they could generate ad revenue if needed without pissing everyone off.

      It CAN be done, and even without being all too clever. Slashdot users are generally less tolerant of ads than the general population, yet there are ads here. We deal with it in one way or another and those ads make money. If Firefox can find some elegant ways to place ads and avoid being dependent on Google, they would be smart to at least have that _plan_ ready in case Google stops paying.

      Again, I don't WANT ads in Firefox. I also don't WANT to die, but I do buy life insurance so my family has some protection if that happens.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        Each November the foundation releases their financial statement. When preparing this financial statement and the last one, they must have seen that the reliance on Google is a problem. They made some small deals with other companies, like including Bing as an _option_ users can set as their default search, but the other deals don't come close to covering their expenses. So to stop being completely reliant on Google, they need some other revenue stream. Somebody sketched a proposal for how they could run ads

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Microlith ( 54737 )

          or take Google's money by showing ads from a Google-owned ad network.

          And it's not this either, given that they're basically sponsored slots that pretty much only new installs see.

          if Mozilla would stop fucking with the interface of Firefox and making it a Chrome clone

          It'll only be a Chrome clone when they remove the ability to customize the UI via add-ons.

          We have muscle memory and we expect things to work certain ways. Changing it just annoys the user base.

          That sounds like the worst reason to slam the brake

        • Though really, if Mozilla would stop fucking with the interface of Firefox and making it a Chrome clone, perhaps people would stop leaving Firefox.

          Yep. I'm sure it has *nothing* to do with one of the most popular websites in the world aggressively advertising chrome at every opportunity.

        • People are leaving Firefox because for a long time Chrome was flat out better (not counting add-ons) - faster, more stable. Firefox has been kicking ass in the last few browser comparisons at Tom's Hardware ( http://www.tomshardware.com/re... [tomshardware.com] ) but I think public perception hasn't caught up.

          And Mozilla is probably happy to take Google's money from the Google Ad Network instead of direct grants, if that's what it takes to keep the Mozilla Foundation open. What they can't do is survive on end user donat
          • I use firefox at work and Chromium at home. I use Firefox because of the tab expose view... which I've stopped using, so I don't know why I still use Firefox. Chromium is better.

        • What you say would be true for 99.999% of web sites. Since Firefox has a couple hundred million users or whatever they can make advertising deals directly with advertisers including Microsoft, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, Netflix, etc. For a multi-million transaction, there's no need to give a cut to a middle-man.

      • I also don't WANT to die

        Firefox existed before it was a huge business and it will still exist if the huge business aspect falls apart.

        I don't think it's controversial to ask if all those Google millions really made the program's development arc better than it was in the more fallow old days.

        • > Firefox existed before it was a huge business and it will still exist if the huge business aspect falls apart.

          I'm afraid it's gotten too large to maintain as a normal freeware project. It has too many platforms, with far too much extraneous bloatware that must be tested and operate correctly to run on a normal freeware shoe string.

        • Firefox existed before it was a huge business and it will still exist if the huge business aspect falls apart.

          Specifically, the Mozilla foundation had revenue of $5.8 million in 2004, when Firefox was launched as a branch of Seamonkey, the Mozilla browser. They still had some support from Netscape, who had developed the browser while they were worth as much as $17 BILLION. Really, Firefox was created by Netscape, a mutli-billion dollar company.

    • Re:Can't wait for this! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kunedog ( 1033226 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @03:32AM (#48357493)
      The former head of Marketing replaced Brendan Eich (who , by contrast, had been a co-founder, former lead architect and CTO) after he was forced out at CEO. Any other questions?

    • The first paragraph is even better:

      10 years ago we built Firefox to give you a choice. The Web was a monoculture and the only way in was through the company that controlled your operating system.

      ... 10 years ago, it was 2004. In 1995, the Web was Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer. Mozilla built their browser on Netscape Navigator; eventually, Firebird forked from Mozilla Suite, which would then become Mozilla Seamonkey, while Firebird would eventually become Firefox. Meanwhile, Galeon and Konqueror were popular options, eventually overruled by Firefox.

      There was no such time as described.

  • Please share here ways to get away from ad loving, privacy sucking browsers.

    I'm still on Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1) Gecko/20090624 Firefox/3.5 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) with adblock/scriptblock/grease monkey :)

  • Fedora (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I assume Fedora will be dropping FIrefox and replacing it with IceWeasel as Debian did long ago. Pretty sure adverts won't fit into Fedora's philosophy very well.

  • What was that new feature again? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tony Isaac ( 1301187 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:41AM (#48356945) Homepage

    (I don't need a button to help me forget things!)

  • duckduckgo (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Good for the chumps who believe the marketing fodder.

    But as the saying goes... if you're not paying, you're the product, not the customer.

  • Contradiction (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tony Isaac ( 1301187 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @12:46AM (#48356969) Homepage

    They added two new features:
    1. A "Forget" button for your privacy, and
    2. Ads, that remember everything forever.

    Sounds like a case of giving with one hand, and taking with the other!

    • Sounds like a case of giving with one hand, and taking with the other!

      Advertizing a free handjob, while it is actually a part of a reach-around.

  • I did it when they force-fed us Australis and have never looked back. I'll never go back to "Fireplop" now. Liberation is available at www.palemoon.org

  • Click "Blank" to win (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Fuck advertising

  • Is this an April Fools joke?
  • I guess Mozilla just signed thier own death warrent. sudo apt-get delete iceweasel. Fuck them.
    • They need revenue to pay their developers. Most of their revenue comes from Google grants - hundreds of millions of dollars. If Google stops paying them, where do you expect them to get the money from? I'd cover the cost myself, but I just checked my bank balance and I don't have a quarter of a billion dollars handy.

  • Sounds like I should just "forget" Firefox (Score:3)

    by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @01:20AM (#48357093)

    ...and stay with Pale Moon.

    At the very least I'm disabling automatic updates on Firefox.

  • Fork it. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by adolf ( 21054 ) <flodadolf@gmail.com> on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @01:29AM (#48357119) Journal

    Please look into Pale Moon [palemoon.org].

    Built from Firefox sources, it is the closest thing to the lightweight and flexible browser that Firefox promised to be that I'm aware of.

    Linux, Windows, Mac, Android, etc.

    • I like Palemoon too, but new users should be aware that the switch will probably cause problems because - despite some claims to the contrary - it isn't 100% compatible with Firefox add-ons. Admittedly, this is more often the fault of the add-on developers, but since the add-ons are usually the primary thing keeping people on Firefox, some extra consideration should be given before switching to its competitor. Especially since it has problems with so many big-name add-ons

      Some examples: AdBlock Plus & Ad

  • The Ads Can Be Disabled (Score:5, Interesting)

    by enter to exit ( 1049190 ) on Tuesday November 11, 2014 @01:40AM (#48357161)
    The Advertisements may be disabled in the preferences. They're trying to diversify their revenue which currently is mostly Google. Over the last few releases they've been highlighting the various privacy features and ideology Firefox has in a bid to differentiate themselves against Chrome, so it' a little Ironic to see this Ad compromise.

    The Ads only occupy unused thumbnail tiles i believe..so it's not obtrusive. As long as us techies can turn it off, I'm happy. Everyone else will hardly notice, and it'll pay the Mozilla devs.

    • I don't want to pay the Mozilla devs. They just like to masturbate their egos rather than fixing huge/serious privacy flaws with sqlite.places, the decay frecancies algorithm, monitoring experiments that have no privacy oversight, etc. Their "privacy team" is supposed to meet once a month - ONCE. Last time I checked it'd been 3-4 months since they actually did it.

    • Kind of like Slashdot.

      I used to not disable ads on Slashdot, you know, a site's got to make money somehow. But lately the ads have gotten SO annoying that I have to disable them, just to make the site usable!

  • Seems Mozilla has sold out. Which makes their choice of DuckDuckGo as default search engine interesting: have they sold out too?

    The thing with DDG is, I'd be happy to believe their no-tracking pitch, but I can't quite understand how they're gonna make money out of a free search engine without it...

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Close