[dd9990]

>If you don't use it, then it is not doing you any harm. If somehow the presence of a button annoys you, then you can click the "customize" menu item and remove that button.

That's extremely condescending. Program defaults, as you are aware, are very powerful. Pocket was shoved in millions of people's faces. Most won't bother or don't have the technical skills to remove it or understand the privacy implications of using it. Someone made that decision. Mozilla encouraged users to submit data to a closed source, US-based company, completely betraying its core principles on openness and freedom. If pocket was built on a generic API and I could host my own (like Sync server) I would maybe have been okay with it. Pocket, as rolled out, tarnishes Mozilla and its image.

[soapdog]

You know what? You're right. Defaults are extremely powerful and I haven't thought about that angle. I too would have loved a public, federated and open API for a "read it later" feature but right now we don't have one. The only way to solve this was to build it or bundle some ready made solution. You can ask the Firefox Development team at their mailing list why they chose to bundle Pocket instead of developing a new standard.

As for the submission of data, the same could be said for all search engines. A browser is a communication tool, it sends data around. What we need to make sure is that it sends only the data you consent and only when/if you want.

Now, lets do a little exercise because you might know more then me about alternatives and I am using this thread to learn new things. If we want a "read it later" feature and we can't build our own, what solution you'd rather have instead of pocket? Is there any other service that you're more comfortable with? If you're not using Pocket and it is not sending any data because you're not using it, having that feature present is actually harming you?

[dd9990]

You tried to look like you were agreeing with me but skirted the main point and instead asked me a question. Excellent PR skills :). The problem isn't the fact a utopian version of a Reader List doesn't exist, the problem is what Mozilla did in shipping Pocket. Let's not get away from that.

>> If you're not using Pocket and it is not sending any data because you're not using it, having that feature present is actually harming you?

Pocket doesn't "hurt" me, it hurts Mozilla's reputation and it hurts Firefox's less knowledgeable users, particularly because it was made a prominent default. You're handing your users over to a closed source company and not even getting paid for it!

In my opinion if Mozilla was really focused on what it says are its values, it would never have shipped with Pocket integrated like it did. Instead it would have have taken the time and developed the feature in Sync and allowed users like me to host my own. Integrating Pocket to simply rush a feature to get a PR win is the problem.

[pseudalopex]

> You can ask the Firefox Development team at their mailing list why they chose to bundle Pocket instead of developing a new standard.

Firefox Sync isn't a standard, but it does its job while respecting my privacy.

There was a reading list feature in development before it was scrapped and replaced Pocket. People have asked why that decision was made. The only answer I've seen is that Pocket popular as an add-on, which just raises more questions.

> If you're not using Pocket and it is not sending any data because you're not using it, having that feature present is actually harming you?

I work with intelligent, technically knowledgeable people who didn't realize Pocket was a third-party service. Or they assumed that Mozilla wouldn't ship a feature like that without client-side encryption. My parents don't understand "client-side encryption", but they understand "even Mozilla can't see your bookmarks", which is what made them comfortable with Firefox Sync. They don't understand why the new kind of bookmark is different.

I no longer trust Mozilla to clearly communicate when, how, or why privacy has taken a back seat to developers' convenience or other goals, so I have to spend time scrutinizing every new feature. Also, getting a private reading list feature into Firefox will be harder, both politically and technically.

[Mithaldu]

> If we want a "read it later" feature and we can't build our own

Go to about:addons in firefox.

Enter "read later" in the top right box.

Browse, investigate and choose one to install on your own computer.

> The only way to solve this was to build it or bundle some ready made solution.

Building or bundling it was the only way to achieve what exactly? You're not being clear about what the goal here even is.

[Aldo_MX]

> Building or bundling it was the only way to achieve what exactly?

The ability to save a page to read it later similar to Safari's and Edge's Reading Lists?

[lewisl9029]

Definitely this.

I don't have issues with Firefox integrating useful functionality into the browser, but what they did with the pocket integration was delegate their duty of protecting users' privacy to a third-party, profit-driven company that does not have users' best interests at heart.

This is an act that betrays the trust that users have placed in Mozilla.