Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Firefox Mozilla The Internet

Firefox Is Launching a New Test Pilot With Scroll To Pay Web Publishers (theverge.com) 65

Posted by BeauHD from the testing-testing-1-2-3 dept.
Mozilla and Scroll have made an earlier-announced partnership slightly more official today with the wider release of a browser extension called "Firefox Better Web." It's part of Firefox's ongoing effort to combat tracking on the web, but with the small twist that it includes the option to sign up for Scroll. The Verge reports: Scroll, if you don't recall, is the $5-a-month service that stops ads from loading on certain websites. It's not technically an ad blocker, but rather lets publishers know they shouldn't serve them in the first place when you visit. For a limited time, the subscription will cost $2.50 per month for the first six months. The Mozilla partnership essentially builds Scroll into a package of tools that Mozilla offers as a test pilot. The idea is to see how far Firefox can go blocking trackers and other malfeasance (short of full ad blocking) without fully breaking the web or de-funding publishers.

The extension includes Scroll and also a "customized Enhanced Tracking Protection setting that will block third-party trackers, fingerprinters, and cryptominers," according to Mozilla. It will work across different desktop browsers, but of course it is designed primarily to be used with Firefox. The deal with Mozilla should get Scroll a much larger userbase, but neither company would disclose any financial terms. Scroll takes a 30 percent cut of your subscription fee and pays the rest out to its partner publishers based on your web browsing habits. It tracks those habits automatically, and the company tells me that it will soon offer users tools to delete their data -- on top of a pledge to never sell that data. Scroll also pledges to make it easier for small publishers to sign up through an automated system soon.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Firefox Is Launching a New Test Pilot With Scroll To Pay Web Publishers More

Firefox Is Launching a New Test Pilot With Scroll To Pay Web Publishers

Comments Filter:

  • I mean, for them to add it twice to Firefox, the payments must be worth it!

  • I prefer addons that block all ads. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @10:06PM (#59868830)

    I can't even begin to pretend how people can use browsers without ad blocking.

    When I see someone else with something like edge just clicking happily away waiting for things to load, I just don't understand it.

    • This probably goes along with the new Apple "Safari Smart Tracking Protection".

      I do not know about anyone else, but I have been using Absolute Complete Tracking and Cookie Prevention, Ad Blocking, and Malicious Code Execution Blocking (all remote code is inherently malicious until proven otherwise) for about half-a-century. It is not "smart". All miscreants are blocked. There are no exceptions. If this means your shit doesn't work, that is your problem, not mine.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Yep, this is just more evidence that Mozilla is still anti-consumer and in the pocket of the ad industry, just like when they killed do not track rather than used it to file GDPR cases against ad companies that ignored it because that was a clear GDPR breach as it clearly highlighted refusal to give consent for tracking of personal data.

      Mozilla is the ad industry's best friend, and they fuck their users at every chance whilst still pretending to care. This is why you can't trust "freedom" and "privacy" from

    • I don't use ad blockers. They don't really annoy me (most of them anyway) and I acknowledge websites must get *some* money in order to continue operating or earn money for their content.

      • I don't use "ad blockers" either, but annoy me enough and I'll put your domain(s) in my /etc/hosts file. Yes I do that manually because I almost always only visit a few dozens websites. Since they rarely change their ad providers, it's pretty easy to block. I barely have over a hundred domains blocked and a few of those have multiple subdomains from the same ad company.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I'll keep blocking ads too but I would be happy to tip sites I use frequently when I visit them.

      Unfortunately Scroll is not a good solution. It relies on tracking which sites you have visited in order to distribute money. I want something where I can give the site an anonymous cryptographic token that the site can then use to claim cash from the fund I pay in to.

      • Low-value cryptocurrencies could be used for that. There's Dogecoin which is popular enough, and Reddcoins which were created especially for that function. There's even a Chrome plug-in but AFAIK development hasn't advanced nearly enough so far.

  • Use free Privacy Badger from EFF. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    "Produced by an organization that is unambiguously working for its users rather than for advertisers". [The EFF] "Privacy Badger keeps note of the “third party” domains that embed images, scripts and advertising in the pages you visit. Privacy Badger looks for tracking techniques like uniquely identifying cookies, local storage “supercookies,” first to third party cookie sharing via image pixels, and canvas fingerprinting. If it observes a single third-party host tracking you on th
  • Give them money to show you ads? What brain dead middle management moron shat out this idea? Use an adblocker, it doesn't even really matter which one. Seriously, who thinks of this shit. To think I used to respect Firefox, they really seem determined to trash what dignity is left of their brand. So now what's the best viable non-Safari/Chrome/Firefox browser that has reasonable plugin compatibility and modern website functionality?

    • Re:What the fuck is this trash? (Score:5, Informative)

      by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Wednesday March 25, 2020 @06:37AM (#59869434) Journal
      Read the article (or even the summary): this is a plugin that blocks ads from participating sites, but compensates those sites for the loss of ad revenue, with money provided by the subscription fees. Ad-blockers on the other hand block all ads, and leave site operators without compensation. Essentially it turns a participating site into paid-for site with an ad-supported free option, and you pay for your visit to the site with your subscription to this FF plugin. It's not a bad idea...

  • “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled malware yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the cyberattacks, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” This internet's greatness and true genius lies in its willingness to be utterly compromised."

  • Uhm, how about not serving the fucking ads (Score:3, Informative)

    by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @10:28PM (#59868888)

    How about NOT serving the fucking ads in the FIRST place FOR FREE. Gee, like maybe using of these plugins or replacements:

    * Pi-Hole [pi-hole.net]
    * Adblock Plus [adblockplus.org]
    * AdBlock [getadblock.com]
    * MVPS Hosts [mvps.org]
    * etc.

    It's not like we don't have options. [tomsguide.com] Nickeling and diming people for what is essentially a free server is gotta be a new low. Keep it up and their won't be any users to block ads for.

    • Re:Uhm, how about not serving the fucking ads (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fulldecent ( 598482 ) on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @11:26PM (#59868986) Homepage

      You can use this new app IN ADDITION to blocking all ads.

      Not using ad block is a sucker's mistake, of course. But I do see value in throwing some money to websites I visit.

      • The problem is that to do this they also have to track all the websites you visit and this will be tied to personally-identifying information making the data even more valuable. So, no thanks.

    • I'm genuinely curious how you think most of the internet is actually paid for?
      Not being snarky, really wondering.

      I use ad blockers myself, but I recognize that universalizing that behaviour to everyone would compel creators and providers to put more content behind paywalls or other (more restrictive) ways to make their income from the activity.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by flink ( 18449 )

        I didn't start using ad blockers until sites started playing animated ads. If you want to put up a static image that says "Shop Amazon" or whatever then it's no worse than reading a magazine or newspaper. But the second I see something flash to try to grab my attention, I block it.

        • Same here.

          Talking of which, all the damn planet is trying to save bandwidth but the fucking video ads are still auto-loading by default? Fucking morans.

      • *Your* bandwidth costs is not _my_ problem.

        That doesn't give you the right to disrespect my time, space, CPU, and bandwidth with your bullshit ads.

        If magically ALL ads were suddenly banned on the internet then Nothing of value was lost.

        If you can't afford to pay for your webpage without ads then you got bigger problems to worry about.

    • +1 for Pi-hole. Been running it on a Pi for the last year or so and it does a great job of blocking ads on pcs, phones, and tablets.

  • HWGA (here we go again) (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mugnyte ( 203225 ) on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @10:28PM (#59868890) Journal

    Camps, please align. Prepare for the usual flag-waving and boot-clomping factions... here come our old favorites now: "ad-paid-content", "paywall content", "information should be free, man", and "well, except for /that/ information" and of course bringing up the rear of the parade: "wait...there's a tool for that?"

    ANNND HERE'S the kickoff from the OSI level 7 line...

    if someone wants to send bytes to my computer because I clicked on a link, I have the right to build/buy scanners that filter the bytes however I like. If that breaks the content, boohoo, but I know I'm to blame. No website can demand the bytes get saved, the images must display, or the scripts must run. If you allow anonymous connections to your server and send data, you are giving that data away. There is no "must digest everything" clause to data, since any and all data can be deemed malicious by the receiver for any reason.

    Roll 2d10+1 for Snark: IE7 is basically an ad-blocker now

    • that would be different. however, I don't see how they can pay them 5 bucks and discount to 2.5 bucks at the same time. why discount a service that I would be only using to pay them money, just to pay them money anyways.

    • > There is no "must digest everything" clause to data

      Not that there won't be an attempt. If movie studios can ever get away with claiming that it's illegal to manipulate viewed movies to censor unwanted parts, because it alters the artistic intent and the producer has a right to have his movie viewed as was intended or not at all; I don't see much to prevent web-based distributors from making a similar claim. Add a token amount of stuff that makes doing so harder, and now suddenly they can accuse you of

  • Oh noooo, websites like Buzzfeed aren't making enough money spewing garbage. Let's get together and help them make more money. Are you serious, Mozilla?

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/ [buzzfeed.com]

    • Oh noooo, websites like Buzzfeed aren't making enough money spewing garbage. Let's get together and help them make more money. Are you serious, Mozilla? https://www.buzzfeed.com/ [buzzfeed.com]

      Judging by the content I'm seeing on there, that site doesn't deserve to make any money.

  • I'm not going to add more crap to Firefox. I've spent the last several years trying to disable things already.
    Oh, you want me to pay a subscription to use my browser?

    Mozilla is obviously getting desperate for money. When they go out of business, will the code be maintained by the community, or will that just be the end?

  • So if you open one of those pages in FF, in order to scroll down and read further you have to pay for the privilege?

  • Tracking, not ads, is the problem (Score:4, Interesting)

    by evanh ( 627108 ) on Wednesday March 25, 2020 @12:06AM (#59869058)

    If they'd stop doing the tracking then I'd have no gripe with some random and/or article related ads.

  • 30% cut (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sebby ( 238625 ) on Wednesday March 25, 2020 @12:06AM (#59869060)

    Scroll takes a 30 percent cut of your subscription fee and pays the rest out to its partner publishers based on your web browsing habits

    I guess we can all thank Apple & Google for setting the tone for how much content creators get ripped off.

    • There have been a lot of scams like this for many years. There are even Government run schemes like this. By the time all the intermediaries are payed and get new yachts there will be nothing left to pay whoever was supposed to be the benificiary of this plan.

      The only win is not to play.

  • I don't feel bad at all for these sites. 1: Their ads are irrelevant and crappy-looking. 2: Their ads are infestuous-- tracking me over the web is something I never consented to by simply visiting their site. 3: I have the right to ultimate control over what I choose to load or run on my computer. Maybe if their ads weren't irrelevant, crappy-looking, or privacy-invasive, I might not mind.
  • This deal sounds like a racket operation, with Scroll extorting money from both sides and Mozilla skimming on top of it. "Pay for protection from ads we shouldn't be serving in the first place". I didn't realize hypocrisy could be so lucrative

    • It is called a "protection racket". This is where someone pays "A" for protection because if you don't pay then something awful will happen to you (usually at the behest of "A"). The defense against protection rackets in the physical world is to refuse to pay and armed self-defense killing "A" as expeditiously as possible.

      On the Internet the defense is the same. Do not pay and defend against the attacker and kill them as quickly an expeditiously as possible (by blocking ALL third-party cookies, ALL adver

  • 1.) about:config -> yes you know -> search for "pocket"
    delete all strings, change all booleans to false

    2.) general -> "surfing" -> two lower check boxes "recommend extensions & functions" -> uncheck

    3.) settings -> start pages -> empty pages

    4.)settings -> start pages -> content of the start screen
    -> uncheck all boxes

    5.) Privacy -> data gathering
    -> uncheck all boxes

    6.) install "noscript"

    7.) install "adblocker for youtube"

  • Maybe Iâ(TM)m different.. but do a lot of people still surf the web on desktop/laptops? (Maybe the plugins exist for Android/iOS?) I use my desktop for work/coding.. but I very rarely if ever just read content on it.
    • The short answer is no. Google owns and controls the software on Android, and will not allow you to meddle in their business model. Same goes for Apple. Don't like it? Perhaps your skills are useful to programming communities developing alternative OS ideas, or at least tools that can override much of what is destroying the user experience on mobile these days. Mozilla, Opera, and others developed out of a community of people that were determined to have an alternative to IE. Slacktavisim is no good i

  • Nice browser. Shame if it were to get some ads on it. You wouldn't want that, would you?

  • Scroll sounds like they're bundling a bunch of "channels" we don't want and selling them all to you for a dirt cheap price - while they take a huge cut for themselves.

    No thanks. Let us choose what ads we want to see. Make the ads valuable to us, and we'll come.

  • on the client, no trackers and no ads ... who's gonna pay me if there's nothing to block ? how very un-fair ... again ... should i just add a cookie or two and five popups like "we use cookies for YOUR convenience, please click this away five times and disable all your extensions b/c i need to get the colour of your sisters panties and THEN i can get paid for letting people block it ? there's something seriously wrong with the world, i noticed before but i think it wasn't as bad when it were all zombie

Slashdot Top Deals

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Close