[lxgr]

You’re spot on: You are reacting seemingly without understanding the fundamentals of what you are reacting to.

Certificate Transparency [1] is an important technology that improves TLS/HTTPS security, and the name was not invented by Mozilla to my knowledge.

If Firefox were to implement a hypothetical IETF standard called “private caching”, would you also be cynical about Firefox “doing something private at this point in time” without even reading up what the technology in question does?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_Transparency

[elmo2you]

> You’re spot on: You are reacting seemingly without understanding the fundamentals of what you are reacting to.

What if I did (understand)? What if I knew a thing or two about it, even some lesser known details and side-effects? Maybe including a controversy or two, or at least an odd limitation and potential hazard at that. But, you correctly do point out that Firefox isn't to blame for implementing somebody else's "standard". Responsible for any and all consequences? Nonetheless, certainly yes.

Aside from now probably not being the best of times for Firefox, my main (potential) concern still stands. However, it is hardly a Firefox-only one, I'll give it that.

[bawolff]

> What if I did (understand)?

I think its pretty clear you don't.

> What if I knew a thing or two about it, even some lesser known details and side-effects?

Then you would explicitly mention them instead of alluding to them.

People who know what they are talking about actually bring up the things that they are concerned about. They don't just say, i know an issue but im not going to tell you what it is.