←back to thread

1036 points deryilz | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.345s | source
Show context
bgnn ◴[] No.44548565[source]
Reading the comments, I see a lot of hate for Firefox. What is the explanation for this (other than people not trying Firefox and assuming it's inferior)?
replies(4): >>44548584 #>>44548685 #>>44548703 #>>44548966 #
qilo ◴[] No.44548966[source]
Mozilla sells user data to third parties. Their statement:

The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43213612

replies(1): >>44572873 #
1. Anamon ◴[] No.44572873[source]
I wouldn't say that this implies they really are selling user data. By that definiton of sale, I can understand why their lawyers would consider it almost impossible to fully comply with.

I totally understand why the Act would use such vague wording and cast such a wide net, considering the underhanded actions of ad companies. But I also understand no longer feeling comfortable guaranteeing that nothing that could reasonably be argued to fall under this definiton would ever happen. Heck, I think some lawyers might argue that even just sending an anonymous GET request to any web server would qualify (disclosing personal information to a third party). Seems like the only way to stay fully compliant is to ship a browser with only an offline mode, haha.