Maybe the more relevant page is Mozilla's own announcement, instead of some random site. See <a href="https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2015/05/21/help-test-changes-to-new-tab-in-firefox-beta/" rel="nofollow">https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2015/05/21/help-test...</a><p>I think Mozilla needs to do a better job explaining why there is "no tracking involved in delivering Tiles". They now just state that, with no information on how it's implemented, and people will get scared if they don't hear specifics. I can imagine this being implemented without tracking, by simply downloading all advertisements and doing the ad selection on the client. The ad may then of course not 'phone home'.<p>They also state that if you have Do Not Track enabled, these new tiles will be disabled "as we believe that most DNT early adopters are seeking to opt out of all advertising experiences". You can also opt out of them by using the cog at the new tab screen.<p>Still, I don't really like this development.
I had nothing against the sponsoring in the new tab screen but this is a bit different. There is so much potential for backfire if they don't do it properly. But at the end, how is that different from Google who is also putting ads by analyzing your entire web history. The main problem is that it's quite hard to finance their business, they are trying to do new stuff in every direction to depend less on Google (new search partners, Read-it-later, Firefox OS...) but it's not an easy task.
Good. Non-profits with proven track records such as Mozilla are the only entities I trust to run an ethical ad network. While I care about privacy and have ghostery, ublock and eff privacy badger installed, I'll be making an exception for Mozilla.<p>As usual, I am disappointed with the HN hive-mind myopia regarding web ads, privacy and non-profits efforts to compete.<p>Also, Mozilla is respecting Do Not Track setting of Firefox users:<p>"* Note: if you set DNT=1, it is possible that you may not be receiving Suggested Tiles. You can very simply enable them on the new tab page with the cogwheel. We made the decision to opt users out of all sponsored Tiles experiences if they have DNT=1 quite early on, as we believe that most DNT early adopters are seeking to opt out of all advertising experiences. However, it’s important to understand that no tracking is involved in delivering Tiles."
You can look at it thisway -- Firefox was funding it's own development by off-shoring it's ads to Google/Bing in exchange for funds. Maybe the world becomes better with Mozilla directly serving ads than it's partners.<p>Of course, I'll be going with the adblocked community version which will be released, with or without Mozilla's backing.
Relevant: <a href="http://ed.agadak.net/2015/04/whys-and-hows-of-suggested-tiles" rel="nofollow">http://ed.agadak.net/2015/04/whys-and-hows-of-suggested-tile...</a><p>Key quote: "to summarize, Firefox makes generic encrypted cookieless requests to get enough data to decide locally in Firefox whether content should be added to the new tab page."
The problem is that nobody is funding Firefox and they need money to continue development.<p>If any of you "goodbye firefox" have a better idea feel free to speak up. Also, you can leave firefox for google, but it collects way more data anyway.<p>Maybe Microsoft Edge will be good so Windows users can just use default browser.
FWIW, I work at Mozilla, but I don't work on this particular project. But, I care because I <3 the web.<p>What I think a lot of folks are missing here is that this is an attempt to change how ads are done. Whether you like it or not, ads are how most of the web gets funded right now.<p>Yes, funding Mozilla would be nice. Even better would be if ads on the web in general were less intrusive and better respected privacy.<p>One of the things this <i>does not</i> do is send your browsing history to remote servers. Instead, the remote server sends you a pile of ads roughly based on your location & language. The browser decides locally what to show. That's a big change, shifting the bulk of the sensitive stuff to your own computer instead of black boxes in the cloud.<p>This isn't just your usual "slap a banner on it" ad network used in all the free mobile apps. And, if the model works in the browser, it might work on the web too.
Are we sure they will be collecting data?<p>You could get personalize advertisements without collecting the data: the browser has your history, it made some kind of profiling (categorize you), and then it request advertisement for your profile.
It's not about where the processing happens or what data is actually transmitted, it's about them pulling this type of shit without clearly asking my permission. And it's not an excuse that Google and others are doing similar things. If you try to win users by publicly saying you're "fighting for privacy", you will be held against higher standards.<p>Mozilla failed really badly here and honestly I'm not sure if they can ever win back my trust after this. Even though I've read through the tech docs released and I know it's not like they are sending your history all over, it's the way they decided to do this that undermined all their efforts so far.
Sigh. I was worried this would happen. I know Mozilla need to make money and with their market share shrinking that is getting harder but these kind of "features" put me off wanting to use Firefox all together. I would rather use Chromium over a version of Firefox with targeted advertising built in.<p>For now at least it looks like being able to disable it is still possible but I cannot find any mention if disabling this also disables the whole analysing my history bit?
I hate ads. I love Mozilla. I understand Mozilla needs the money. I don't mind supporting them with cash. Why not have a freemium option for folks to subscribe to Firefox and hide the ads?
Bad idea. I hate even the website icons from the new tab page. They sometimes show sites I don't want to advertise (xxx). They make "new tab" work slower and I never feel inclined to click on them.<p>Now they are trying to stuff even more slowness inducing ads in the new tab - that means - exactly the moment you wan to to something ELSE.<p>That's the problem - when you open a tab, you don't really want to see the ads. When you search on Google, you might want to see the ads.
I'm okay with this.<p>I love firefox and was the first few when netscape open Mozilla and I jumped on board and ditch IE5.<p>So far I trust Mozilla more so than Google or Microsoft on browser software.
Is there a project to make a decent browser that doesn't have any intention of making a profit or selling out its users, and has governance appropriate to make that a reality?<p>It seems like this is necessary. If I can contribute to that, pre-existing or not, I will start today.<p>There are 3 billion web users: between us we must have enough altruism and skill to compete with this.
Bye Firefox.<p>Edit: "We promise to put you first and never sell your personal data. What else do you want for the Web?" -- <a href="https://twitter.com/firefox/status/461550580729536512" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/firefox/status/461550580729536512</a><p>Don't <i>collect</i> my personal data.
And FF forks will gain traction, and so the cycle continues.<p>I personally switched over to Pale Moon when the whole UI "update" happened, and it's looking more and more as though I made the right choice.
Couldn't iceweasel just change the default so the ads are not shown? It is free software and they already got experience to do changes to the code in order to change the name and icon.
what a terrible change. i've spent the last week developing two firefox addons; now i regret that, because i'll never use a browser with embedded advertising.
They're a business, just like anyone else. Unless we all start throwing thousands of donations at them, they have to find ways to monetise to keep up the awesome work they do. If it's both relevant and intuitive, then no harm done. Remember, your browsing history isn't exactly a big secret. That's why incognito modes exist in most browsers.