this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
260 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
60022 readers
3523 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The article is about them cutting ties with the company after finding out the CEO of the partner company was doing something bad for privacy. Mozilla, as far as we know at this point, isn’t guilty of anything bad except maybe not thoroughly digging into the CEO of this other company’s past thoroughly enough. Mozilla was not profiting off of selling your data. They’re not even sure if the other company was directly using their “privacy” service to benefit the CEO’s data harvesting company, just that he had been doing data harvesting, and then started a “privacy” company to remove data from the data aggregating sites, like the exact ones he funded.
So, are you sure you’re clear on what happened? Because Mozilla rectified an oversight on their part after they discovered a partner company’s executive had ties to the exact industry they were supposed to be fighting.
Yes, and they never should have been in that position to begin with. Mozilla’s extreme lack of due diligence has lost my trust for every other service they offer. Is that so hard to understand? Or is your head so far up Mozilla’s ass that you can’t see the obvious?
lol what an insanely combative position to take. It’s a breakdown in due diligence, for sure. No argument there.
But an “extreme lack?” No, not really. It’s easy for them to overlook something like this. I’m not a corporate investigative person at all, so I don’t know the proper procedures. But checking into executive holdings and business history seems, I dunno, like something that probably isn’t done very often—if at all. Especially when that CEO is a foreign national.
Yeah, they shouldve—but that’s easy to say now that something like this has happened. The company the guy worked for was the one to uncover it—so the company that put him in charge didn’t catch it before giving him the position. So, really, it’s a breakdown on the cybersecurity outfit’s protocol, and Mozilla got dragged into this while being twice removed from it.
Look, I’m not a huge Mozilla stan or anything. I hadn’t been using Firefox for a long time, I’d been a DDG browser user, before that Brave. But, brave runs on chromium not to mention all their nonsense with crypto, so I bailed on them and went to DDG. And then recently only switched back to Firefox. So you’re barking up the wrong tree on your stupid crusade to try to paint me as someone with my head up Mozilla’s ass.
From where I stand, they happen to be one of the best browsers these days, especially for privacy. I used to have speed issues with it, which is why I bailed on it so long ago. If this information came out and they decided to stick with this company after the company failed to properly vet their CEO? Yeah, I’d be pissed. But they’re taking an extra step in cutting ties with a company they’d been doing business with for a month, after they are rectifying their own mistake.
Use Firefox, don’t use Firefox, I couldn’t give one shit less. But it just seemed like you misunderstood what happened, took a strong stance, and now are just digging your heels in. It just seems…dumb. But like I said, do whatever the fuck you want. You just kinda seem like an asshole. No offense.