This is one more anti-privacy move from Mozilla in a series of such moves.
I am now using Safari and have to keep an eye on the family computer to see what crap Mozilla decides to install next.
The nice thing about ethical organisations is that you can have peace of mind and don't have to worry about how they're going to screw you when their marketing department runs amok. Because of cliqz, the annoying telemetry (aka spyware) and this incident, I don't trust Mozilla any more.
Moving to Chrome would indeed be silly, bit it doesn't mean things are rosy.
> It definitely sucks, but I don't see how it was anti-privacy at all.
It definitely increased the attack surface area[1] with no upside for 99.9%[2] of Firefox users.
1. It's a juicy target: an addon that can modify the content of any page a user visits? It doesn't take much of an imagination to think of how this could be subverted.
2. My conservertive guess of the fraction of Fx users not interested in Mr Robot easter eggs; I probably ought to add a couple more "9"s
That's Mozilla taking another step down a very slippery slope. "It didn't hurt anyone" doesn't excuse ethical or moral wrongs. Given Mozilla's stated commitments to privacy and integrity, their choice here violated them.
I am now using Safari and have to keep an eye on the family computer to see what crap Mozilla decides to install next.
The nice thing about ethical organisations is that you can have peace of mind and don't have to worry about how they're going to screw you when their marketing department runs amok. Because of cliqz, the annoying telemetry (aka spyware) and this incident, I don't trust Mozilla any more.
Moving to Chrome would indeed be silly, bit it doesn't mean things are rosy.