this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
411 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

81869 readers
4956 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Ulrich@feddit.org 4 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

Just because if it were opt-in, people wouldn't have chosen to activate it

Because people overwhelmingly do not change any defaults whatsoever, regardless of what they like or want.

If you put a button in the settings that did nothing but automatically generate a $5 bill, no one would click that either.

[โ€“] dsilverz@calckey.world 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

@Ulrich@feddit.org @technology@lemmy.world

Because people overwhelmingly do not change any defaults whatsoever

Most roosters wouldn't normally seek the paws of the fox to be hugged by, what an astonishing news!

You see, that's exactly what plays favorably for things pushed with "opt-out" mechanisms, anything. If people are less likely to change the settings to better enhance their UX (be it due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of proactive pursuit or because they deem their current settings "good enough"), this means people would be more likely to have the clankers shoved down their throats if said clankers were to be part of default settings.

In fact, if settings would very likely go unchanged, then Mozilla could push anything, absolutely anything under they will, "shall be the whole of the Law" with the legally-required "opt-out" mechanisms in place.

In the foreseeable future, we'd have Firefox as a new "Agentic Browser" where a clanker does all the tiring and utterly boring effort of "browsing the web" as the user watches their credit card being depleted by prompt injections carefully placed amidst Unicode exploits across the web by scammers. But, hey, let us not worry, there's always a button to turn it off! ๐Ÿ˜„

[โ€“] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Most roosters wouldn't normally seek the paws of the fox to be hugged by, what an astonishing news!

Whoosh. The point is "the roosters" don't seek anything at all. It could be 50 lbs. of delicious cow shit, but if you don't put it down in front of them, they're not going to go looking for it.

Please read my comments in their entirety before replying.