[folkrav]

> For those who say : "you can turn these things off", this is not an excuse!

The telemetry is opt-in, the setting pops up once on first run. Ads are not tracking, you may disagree with their very existence, but they're not a privacy concern. Calling studies "malware" is just disingenuous. I don't see what MITI has anything to do with the rest. DRM does suck, but _not_ having it would be literal popular suicide, and in the current browser landscape, would literally mean letting Chromium take over even more than it already does.

[bobcall]

> The telemetry is opt-in...

It is not "opt-in". The popup tells you to change those settings and if you don't do anything, it is on. Just by unchecking the box in settings does not turn off all telemetry.

> Calling studies "malware" is just disingenuous.

I guess you don't remember the "Mr.Robot" incident[1] that we were not suppose to know about and many did not consent? Pushing an update with "Studies" enabled by default and then pushing this malicious software is not consent!

> I don't see what MITI has anything to do with the rest.

Mozilla* is not in a position to be calling out other companies when they themselves are guilty of doing the exact same things.

[1] https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/16/firefox-mr-robot-extensi...

[Dylan16807]

> I guess you don't remember the "Mr.Robot" incident[1] that we were not suppose to know about and many did not consent?

That was not malware. I will explain this a thousand times if I have to. If you didn't manually configure its secret setting, it did literally nothing.

[FTLJohnson]

So, we can install software on people's computers and take up space on their hard drives without their permission now and it's not considered malicious? OK!

[folkrav]

Malware has a definition[1] :

> Malicious computer software that interferes with normal computer functions or sends personal data about the user to unauthorized parties over the Internet.

Taking up a couple KBs of space to do nothing is not even comparable. From a moral standpoint, was it okay from them to install that extension on people's computers? No. Was it malware? No.

[1] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=define+malware&t=h_&ia=definition

[Shivetya]

consider that many options in firefox are not easily selected in dialog boxes it leaves a lot to be desired.

now what eventually will have be settled is that many sites have adopted the policy of blocking items in turn prohibits use of the site at all. this is the battle I am curious how it will pan out. currently most can be avoided by turning javascript off but someone will find other means to test