this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
636 points (82.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

27330 readers
1228 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 325 points 3 days ago (9 children)

Important context!

They had to change this because newer laws like the CCPA classify some ways of transferring/processing data as a "sale", even if no money is exchanged.

See: this Firefox FAQ where they say:

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.”

Similar privacy laws exist in other US states, including in Virginia and Colorado. And that’s a good thing — Mozilla has long been a supporter of data privacy laws that empower people — but the competing interpretations of do-not-sell requirements does leave many businesses uncertain about their exact obligations and whether or not they’re considered to be “selling data.”

In order to make Firefox commercially viable, there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar. We set all of this out in our privacy notice. Whenever we share data with our partners, we put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share is stripped of potentially identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

We’re continuing to make sure that Firefox provides you with sensible default settings that you can review during onboarding or adjust at any time.

[–] ITGuyLevi@programming.dev 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

All those things they listed I would also consider selling my data. Even if you are offering my info in exchange for peanut butter cookies, you are trading it for something else.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Then donate!

They are in this situation because they have to keep up with chrome's capabilities _ velocity with a team that's 1/4 the size at best.

Essentially they have to produce more with less and they have a funding problem. Almost all of their funding goes into software engineering salaries.

At the risk of not being able to keep up and becoming an obsolete web browser leaving Chrome as the only dominant one there is a shitty position of being the bad guy so that you can get money.

In short, I sympathize with the reasons why they are having to do this even if I greatly dislike them. Reality is complicated.

[–] blind3rdeye@aussie.zone 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The text you quoted sounds like a reasonable and normal definition of a sale to me. i.e. transferring to another business in exchange for something else of value.

So yeah, Firefox previously promised not to do this, "not ever", and now they say they need to do sell your personal data "in order to make Firefox commercially viable".

But hang on a second... Firefox is not a commercial product. So making it 'commercially viable' is highly questionable in itself.


It's a shame that Mozilla's current leadership is more interested in self-enrichment than in the past. But Firefox is still the very best option by far. I hope that the Ladybird project becomes strong the future, if for no other reason than pressure Firefox into staying good.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Firefox is a commercial product. Is it not?

They need to make money so that they can fund hundreds of engineers salaries to keep building it and maintaining web standards operability.

And somehow do this while keeping off with Chrome who has a team 4-5x their size.

Trying to figure out a way to be independent of Google while competing with Google is a tough nut to crack. If they can't sell it and they can't get enough donations, then then it comes down to partnerships and advertising.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 69 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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.”

Yes. That is selling. If you exchange customer data for money or other valuables, that is the definition of "selling".

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 60 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Not in all cases.

As an example, Firefox has the option of sponsored results, which send anonymized technical data when a link is clicked, essentially just saying "hey, this got an ad click, add it to the total." It doesn't send info about you, your identity, or your other browsing habits.

This counts as a "sale" even though no actual identifying information about you was exchanged. They mention this in the paragraphs I attached, when they talk about data sent via OHTTP.

I don't think any reasonable person would consider a packet being sent saying "some unknown user, somewhere in the world clicked your sponsored post" as "selling your personal information", but that's how the CCPA could be used to classify it, so to avoid getting in legal trouble, Firefox can't technically say that they "never sell your data", even if that's the extent of it.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago (3 children)

This counts as a “sale” even though no actual identifying information about you was exchanged. They mention this in the paragraphs I attached, when they talk about data sent via OHTTP.

I mean... it should count as a sale, because it's a sale. They are selling information about browsing habits for money. Regardless of whether they include identifying information, it is still personal data that they are selling. They removed that line from their FAQs because they changed their minds about selling personal data. It has fuck all to do with weird legal definitions. They promised they wouldn't ever sell personal data, and then they were like "wellll......"

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 25 points 3 days ago (8 children)

"Selling personal data" and "selling ads that we can tell if they are clicked by an anonymous user" are completely different, in my eyes at least.

"Selling personal data" sounds like someone taking your personally identifiable information and giving it to someone for money. What they're doing isn't that, so they're not "selling personal data"

They're selling ad views, not your information.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 17 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

That data is about as personal as someone sitting in a park keeping a tally of how many people with a blue jacket walk by. "Somebody posted a comment on lemmy" is not the same as "@elbucho@lemmy.world posted a comment on lemmy".

Particularly if you opt out (as I have) and no tally mark is added for you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jve@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Which is convenient, because now when they decide they do want to sell your data, it’s fine because their privacy policy doesn’t say it anymore!

Man. I want to root for Mozilla, but they are definitely looking down the barrel of enshittification.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 36 points 3 days ago

Thank you. I was hoping this would be among the top upvoted comments.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago

Important context!

They had to change this because newer laws like the CCPA classify some ways of transferring/processing data as a “sale”, even if no money is exchanged.

What? No. Do you really think their "sharing" with "partners" who are "providing sponsored suggestions" doesn't involve money being exchanged? 🤔

Here is an abridged version of that FAQ entry consisting only of substrings of it:

The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because [...] to make Firefox commercially viable [...] we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar

All of the other words in there implying that they had to stop promising not to sell user data because of some (implied to be unreasonable) "LEGAL definition" of "sale" is imo insulting to the reader.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 80 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yes we all know mozilla sucks, still ff is the best browser by far

[–] lauha@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Wayyyyyyy lesser.

We're talking Mussolini versus your local grocery store clerk who's a dick sometimes.

[–] lauha@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Three. There are three evils in the browser space.

[–] Jyek@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ehhhh Microsoft edge is just chrome that steals your data for Microsoft rather than Google. It's like 2 different bank robbers that use the same brand of gun to hold you hostage.

[–] overcast5348@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

Safari is the third, not edge.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 282 points 3 days ago (15 children)
[–] underscores@lemmy.zip 125 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Theo is a shill and product expert masquerading as a 10x developer when at best he's an intermediate web dev

[–] tyler@programming.dev 53 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Not even intermediate. He makes so many bad calls that it’s honestly great to watch him to know what not to do. You’ll be right about 95+% of the time.

I had to stop watching him though because I’d spend hours writing up comments to correct everything he said.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] TheGreenWizard@lemmy.zip 42 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Fuck that guy, all he does is make ragebait

[–] JadeSleeps@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago

True theo, was one of the devs who went against the stop killing games campaign claiming it was to hard for developers to have a basic end of life plan for software and other nonsense to justify game publishers screwing us over.

[–] sakuraba@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago

i hate that fucking guy and his fucking mustache

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 39 points 3 days ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Feyd@programming.dev 66 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (12 children)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 67 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Didn't Firefox just release a new feature that prevents fingerprinting? Hard to get a reading on Mozilla these days.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 217 points 3 days ago (10 children)

It's because people looked at a line of a diff without looking at the actual context.
It's like finding the line in a diff where someone deleted a call to "check password" and concluding that this means the service is no longer verifying passwords.

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/faq/

We never sell your personal data. Unlike other big tech companies that collect and profit off your personal information, we’re built with privacy as the default. We don’t know your age, gender, precise location, or other information Big Tech collects and profits from.

Basically, they consolidated and clarified their data privacy policies to be legally accurate. People took a content change to be a policy change on the assumption that you can't just delete words in one place and put new ones somewhere else.

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 71 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ha. I'd expect nothing less from Theo.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] nocteb@feddit.org 12 points 3 days ago

throw std::future_error(std::make_error_code(std::future_errc::broken_promise));

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Theo to me had the same energy as Pirate Software. One of these days there's gonna be some cancelling, someone mark these words.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 3 days ago

Reminds me of the time Google decided that "Don't be evil" wasn't their vibe any more.

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 27 points 3 days ago
load more comments
view more: next ›