Timestamps and Generated Summary Below:
Video Description:
Links:
- https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/wiki/Mozilla_introduces_TOS_to_Firefox
- https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/wiki/Mozilla
- https://librewolf.net/
Timestamps:
- 00:00:00 - tl;dr solution use librewolf
- 00:00:52 - my tl;dr thoughts
- 00:01:08 - what mozilla did
- 00:02:28 - mozilla crashed archive.org…
- 00:03:03 - Louis gets trolled by a monster
- 00:03:56 - firefox’ removes statement on not selling personal data.
- 00:04:40 - terms were changed without explicitly alerting users
- 00:05:08 - mozilla did this at the WORST POSSIBLE TIME
- 00:07:05 - the worst communication policy
- 00:07:14 - California consumer protection act
- 00:08:03 - The suspicious part mozilla put in
- 00:08:26 - What is “selling data” ?
- 00:08:54 - Existing business practices exist in grey areas to CCPA
- 00:12:46 - Just use librewolf to avoid all this…
- 00:16:27 - Privacy policy is still fairly strong
- 00:17:20 - How money for nothing destroys people & companies
Generated Summary:
This YouTube video analyzes Mozilla’s recent controversial changes to its terms of service and privacy policy, arguing that the company’s financial success has led to complacency and poor communication.
Main Topic: The video critiques Mozilla’s handling of its terms of service update, focusing on the poor communication, the ambiguity surrounding data usage, and the potential conflict with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).
Key Points:
- Poor Communication: Mozilla’s announcement and explanation of the changes were poorly worded, confusing, and caused significant user backlash. The changes were implemented before users were notified.
- Ambiguous Data Usage: The updated terms, while not explicitly stating Mozilla sells user data, created the impression that it might be doing so, particularly in light of the CCPA’s broad definition of “selling data.” The video highlights the existing practice of sharing data with partners like Google in exchange for financial compensation.
- Financial Complacency: The core argument is that Mozilla’s substantial financial stability (largely from Google’s payments to be the default search engine) has led to a lack of urgency and accountability. High executive salaries are cited as evidence of this complacency.
- Alternative Browser: The video promotes LibraWolf, an open-source fork of Firefox that removes telemetry and sponsored content, as a privacy-focused alternative.
- CCPA Compliance: The video discusses the CCPA and how Mozilla’s practices, particularly its data sharing with Google, might fall into a gray area of compliance.
Highlights:
- Comparison of Mozilla’s old and new FAQ pages regarding data selling, showing the removal of the “we don’t sell your data” promise.
- Analysis of the CCPA’s definition of “selling data,” demonstrating how Mozilla’s existing practices could be interpreted as violating it.
- Discussion of Mozilla’s revenue streams, emphasizing the reliance on Google’s payments and investment income.
- Contrast between Mozilla’s approach and Brave’s proactive marketing campaign to address ad-blocker issues.
- The presenter’s personal preference for LibraWolf due to its default privacy settings.
- The presenter’s assertion that Mozilla’s problems stem from financial success leading to atrophied communication and responsiveness.
About Channel:
I started as a studio repair technician at Avatar & started a Macbook component level logic board repair business. This channel shows repair & data recovery work & shows how to perform these repairs step by step. There are many outside forces that make it hard to fix things now; willful actions from manufacturers to limit access to parts & schematics. I talked about this to try and spark mainstream recognition of the “Right to Repair” movement.
I realized that restrictions placed on repair were just a canary-in the-coal-mine for many of the anti-ownership, anti-consumer practices that would become common in every industry, which I discuss & try to push back against every day.
Dude hates Tor Browser and privacy in general by promoting librewoof.
Thats anti-consumer, anti-ownership behavior.
Your making wild assumptions. Just because someone doesn’t mention Tor doesn’t mean they hate privacy
Just because someone updates their ToS to include language that caters to California laws so that they meet certain definitions, but still remain committed to protecting their user’s data, doesn’t mean they hate privacy either.
But here we are.
You made a definitive statement
Louis Rossman hates TOR browser and privacy.
You haven’t based this on actions or statements a reasonable person would see as supporting your statement.
The lack of action is the statement. He promotes liberwold and not Tor Browser.
That doesn’t mean he hates TOR Browser and hates privacy.
When I bought coffee this morning the barista didn’t mention TOR either, and from that interaction I don’t know if they hate privacy
Did the barista mention any other fucking coffees besides whatever company they worked at? Do they home brew? Do they grow their own?
Tha fuq kinda argument is that?
Are you saying Louis is being paid by LibreWolf?
Whts wrong with librewolf now?
Per the librarywool docs:
… And that is not an entirely reasonable position? What I read here is that they both promote the Tor browser for that use case and advise the user to not use LW so they dont accidentally become more identifiable, as a wolf in a herd of tors so to say.
Louis has never promoted the Tor Browser.
It is literally in your screenshot though? Even with a download link.
So here is the thing.
Louis is promoting LibreWolf, a Firefox fork. He never said anything about the Tor Browser. Me, myself, and I was the one who noticed that Louis left out the Tor Browser. He skipped it.
If he cared about privacy, he would promote the Tor Browser. Not lavawood.
Ah I guess I got confused about whom we were talking there. I don’t know the Louis guy well enough to judge him, I just came across an interesting post on my all feed and assumed you were referring to librewolf themselves from your phrasing.
Yes I’d agree that is an important option that he ignores there, but my confusion stems from the suggestion that librewolf is “bad” now. Which I see now wasn’t what you meant
This is the first I’m hearing about this.
He seems to switch between Brave and LibraWolf.
Please share the timestamp (or link/source) where he mentions his hate for 'Tor Browser and privacy."
And please share your preferred browser forks that we should use instead of LibraWolf.
The entire video is a lubrawoof ad. Instead of promoting Tor Browser, he went with lobrewofe. Timestamps are in the OP.
Preferred browser fork is Tor Browser.
Ah, okay.
Disdain is for not promoting Tor Browser and instead recommending a fork of Mozilla.
Thanks for clarifying!