this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
987 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
3123 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Clarity is needed here. The California language that sparked all this is qualified with "about FakeSpot's products and services". Meaning it could simply be third-party services that they send their own emails through.

After reading their privacy policy, nothing jumps out at me that contradicts this.

To be clear, I'm not a fan of the extension's collection practices, but the down votes could be because this may be unwarranted fear.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Unwarranted fear or healthy skepticism? This is the perfect time to “just ask questions.” Firefox is selling itself as a privacy respecting platform and therefore should be held to a higher standard than the garbage that is chrome. If it can pass the test it will be proven again and earn more trust which should result in more users, if it fails then it deserves to be criticised and lose users. Point is if you are selling yourself as privacy respecting you are selling yourself by default as ethical.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

100% agree. I wasn't trying to say the collection practice isn't bad, just that the other linked threads may be taking things a bit farther than what the policy actually says.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok. It’s things like this where the detail matters so thank you

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I love the wholesome and fact-focused discussions here on Lemmy. Good show, Mr. SuckMyWang. 🤝

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because they are now owned by Mozilla. As stated above, I, like others, don't like the practice, and I hope Mozilla adjusts acordingly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You understand why they changed those terms, right? Because Mozilla isn't reselling the data and the data can't go elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, but this doesn't mean much. If they didn't transfer ownership, FakeSpot could do whatever they wanted with that data. By forcing the transfer, Mozilla can choose to keep it private.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago)