|
|
|
|
|
by jwfxpr
2852 days ago
|
|
You're succumbing to the allure of what-aboutism here. Yes, granted, Mozilla aren't perfect and have made some significant missteps (not all of which they've suitably amended), and deserve criticism for them. But just because they're vulnerable to criticism doesn't invalidate what they're saying here, and doesn't make another entity who regularly handles more sensitive data in less private ways less vulnerable to criticism. Should this message be coming from another source? Yes, but 'as well as', not 'instead of'. Is it good for user advocacy that a highly recognised source is promoting this message, even if the source is flawed? Yes, it is. |
|