[reaperducer]

I'll just stop using them instead.

Easily said, until it's your bank, or a government entity, or the electric company, or any of the thousands of other entities that have started blocking Firefox.

Firefox should really camouflage its user agent, or make it trivial to do so.

[pornel]

That's why Firefox needs a userbase too large to ignore.

If the overwhelming majority of users submits to Google, then Google has the power to erode privacy for everyone.

[JohnFen]

> Easily said, until it's your bank, or a government entity, or the electric company

Still easily said, since I don't use the websites for any of those things anyway. If it's really important, or involves very sensitive personal information, I'm not doing it on the web.

> or make it trivial to do so.

There are extensions that make this very trivial.

[jjulius]

This is my approach, as well. And if I absolutely had to use their web service? Well, keep the bank in my Chrome bookmarks bar, and only go there when I'm in Chrome. Head on back to Firefox when I'm done doing whatever it is that I needed to do.

[chgs]

It’s probably a good idea to have a separate browner for your bank anyway, on a seperate user account, probably a separate VM.

[shadowgovt]

> If it's really important, or involves very sensitive personal information, I'm not doing it on the web.

It's definitely a position you can take, but that's a very minority position among web users these days.

For the rest of us, "Just stop doing it on the web" would be a pretty substantial lifestyle change and, practically speaking, not worth it.

[JohnFen]

I never claimed it was a majority position. I was only expressing my own stance. Whether or not anyone else shares it with me is irrelevant.

> For the rest of us, "Just stop doing it on the web" would be a pretty substantial lifestyle change

It really isn't, though, at least not for most people I know who aren't into tech. It would certainly mean changing some habits, which is often hard, but (at least in the US) it means giving up a relatively small amount of convenience, not a substantial lifestyle change.

[squidbeak]

If Firefox changes it UA for these sites, their operators will see even less needs to support the open standards it champions.

[Prickle]

Internet banking is so ridiculously insecure, I always go do it myself in person.

Although, I rarely have to do anything with the bank that would require any online or offline process beyond using an ATM.

So no, that wouldn't really be a reason for me to stop using Firefox.

[alyandon]

My soon-to-be-not-current insurance company.

https://imgur.com/a/7WMuu7c

[EasyMark]

That’s likely just because they don’t bother to test at all in Firefox, not because they will ban you.

[heraldgeezer]

>Firefox should really camouflage its user agent, or make it trivial to do so.

Mozilla employee made an easy user agent switcher called Chrome Mask

https://old.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1eic7bj/chroe_mask...

[ThunderSizzle]

I already need to camouflage my user agent because some websites broke on a Linux host running chromium or Firefox. Switching UA to windows fixed this.

I believe it was an analytic bug in Disney+, where they didn't except Linux to be an acceptable OS.

[chgs]

My bank and electric company don’t block Firefox, not sure why they would, but it’s not like there’s no competition.

My government certainly won’t do that, they have a strong open data background.