Found this notification this morning on my pixel 6.

  • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zipEnglish
    43·
    6 days ago

    Okay, turned it off. If a site needs my location it can ask me and I can politely tell it to fuck off unless it has a warrant.

  • umbraroze@lemmy.worldEnglish
    504·
    6 days ago

    Wait a second. You’re expecting Google to not FUD? Ha ha ha oh wow. I mean I didn’t actually expect them to do so, but yeah.

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.mlEnglish
    48·
    6 days ago

    Google: “Forcing us to divest Chrome could have impacts on our ability to support Mozilla and their high executive salaries as we own the space with Chrome.”

    Also Google:

  • cley_faye@lemmy.worldEnglish
    772·
    7 days ago

    That’s a regular notification, which would happen for any application whose data policy is changed on the Play Store page. These policy are as declared by the app publisher. This would be the same for any application that didn’t check that “sharing data with third party” box earlier, then checked it later on.

    • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
      31·
      6 days ago

      I don’t get what your comment is getting at. I don’t view this post as saying anything special or unique about the notification. I see it as a warning that Firefox is now doing this.

      • Astra@lemmy.mlEnglish
        4·
        6 days ago

        The legal definition of “sell” has changed in several major markets, and that’s (supposedly) why Firefox has recently changed their terms. The word “sell” is now ostensibly broad enough to include “give to anybody for any reason”, including if you use Firefox for any reason where you would legitimately want and need Firefox to give (“sell”) your data - for example if you use it for: literally any shopping or even just browsing store pages; any interactive (real world) maps where you may want to use your location; any searches where you want local businesses to be listed; any search engine that may want to use your location to aid in results; etc. etc. etc.

        Any legitimate exchange of data can now be construed as “selling” because of the new legal definitions, regardless of if anyone is actually selling anything.

        It’s very possible that nothing has changed - that Firefox hasn’t started selling user data, they’re just updating their terms (and this app listing) to reflect the changes in the legal definitions of “sell”.

        • Bazoogle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          5 days ago

          The whole “legal definitions are why we changed” is definitely what they’re rolling with, but I don’t think a lot of what you said is correct. Websites selling data is not the same as firefox selling data. If a site sells your data while you’re using firefox, that is in no way shape or form involved with firefox. That’s also not what they are claiming. They are strictly talking about the data that firefox directly collects and distributes. It would include search results if you searched via the address bar, I suppose. They have sold data for a while, but it’s anonymized (https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/sponsor-privacy).

          Firefox is free to use, but it costs a lot of money to develop. They need money, nobody here is denying that. Many users on this platform have tried to avoid any form of data collection as much as possible (myself included) so they would rather pay to fund it (though many don’t). However, most people would rather pay for the service with ads and data collection. Because to them, it’s basically free. Most users would never even consider moving to Firefox if it was paid. They could offer two options, one paid and one “free”, but they haven’t done that yet and it’s not clear if they plan to.

          Most importantly, it’s really about being transparent. If they need money, they shouldn’t try to hide the fact they are selling anonymized data by saying “We never sell you data” or to be like “oh no, we are doing it because of legal definitions” when in reality they are selling data. I get it’s a PR movement, but most of the people intentionally using Firefox are tech savvy people wanting to get away from Google’s big brother approach. I get people defending Firefox, and I also get people hating on Mozilla, but we should also be clear about the reality. Firefox is, and has been selling your data (in some form), but now the laws are changing to make it more clear that what they’re doing is in fact selling data.

          • Astra@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1·
            5 days ago

            Which parts do you disagree with? I’m not talking about websites selling your data after you access them through Firefox, I’m saying that now - with new definitions of “sale”/“sell” - that Firefox giving anybody any data for almost any reason can be legally construed as “selling”. This isn’t just the case for Firefox, it’s the case for literally any web browser, and anything that can access the internet for any reason.

            Yes, I thought about including the fact that Firefox does engage in ad-based revenue, and I suppose I should’ve, but Firefox is pretty upfront about this and allows users to opt out of targeted advertising - and this has been the case since long before this past week or two. These ads only appear on the “new tab” page, and only if you consent to seeing them. Anybody who’s dropping Firefox for this recent controversy seens to be missing that. It’s very possible (and personally I think it’s likely) that nothing at all has changed from within Firefox.

            • Bazoogle@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              2 days ago

              This comment reads differently to me than the one of yours I replied to. When you said:

              for example if you use it for: literally any shopping or even just browsing store pages That read to me like you were talking about the store itself, and not firefox.

              Regardless, I agree with what you’ve just said more. My argument is moreso that Firefox has been selling data (so nothing really has changed with them), but now they’re being required to state that they’re selling data. I get that Mozilla doesn’t want to be lumped in with “selling data” groups, because it can be done in very extremely different manners with varying levels of invasion on privacy. But I also think they should have been more up front about where they get some of their revenue, and not tried to be like “We never sell your data” while literally having sponsored suggestions (both on the new tab page, and website suggestions in the address bar).

              As for what the current drama impacts on this? Nothing, really. Other than they are being required to disclose that they sell data, and their getting backlash because they’ve been trying to pretend they don’t. Now that they’re lumped in with the “data selling” corporations in peoples minds (even though they’re very different than google), who knows if that will give them the extra room to be a bit more invasive with their data collection. They’ve already crossed the largest PR hurdle, so the future incremental changes would be much easier. There’s no guarantee, but with traditional enshitification, it wouldn’t surprise me.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.worldEnglish
        61·
        6 days ago

        Have you read all the other replies? “Google mad”, “Google putting Firefox in the dirt”, “False info”, etc.

  • devedeset@lemm.eeEnglish
    822·
    7 days ago

    As of the latest Chrome update on PC, they have dropped support for uBlock. You can still technically enable it, but they disabled it by default once you update.

    That got me back to Firefox with breakneck speed.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.eeEnglish
      203·
      7 days ago

      Hopefully soon Librewolf, Fennec F-droid and other forks will become mainstream.

      I haven’t switched to Librewolf on pc yet; hoping that turning off the telemetry/etc options in ff is enough, but I’m starting to think it might not be long.

      • FrChazzz@lemm.eeEnglish
        82·
        7 days ago

        I switched over to LibreWolf recently. I discovered Vivaldi just a few hours before I learned about the Manifest v3 stuff for Chromium (which is a shame because I actually LOVED Vivaldi). I really want to try Zen Browser, but I’m using old, 2011-era Macs (running Ubuntu 24.04 on one) and it won’t install. LibreWolf is great because of its clean, minimal design and absolute privacy-forward thinking. I’ve enjoyed it so far (and I’m only running it on the Ubuntu machine).

      • Zink@programming.devEnglish
        3·
        6 days ago

        I was that same way with Firefox for a while, but after I gave Librewolf a long-term test drive I stuck with it.

        If you’re used to Firefox with the privacy stuff cranked up, from a user perspective Librewolf is basically just that. But I like knowing that some of the Mozilla stuff is actually removed.

        They also roll out updates quickly. I’m pretty sure I updated Firefox and Librewolf to 136.0.1 today just hours apart.

      • devedeset@lemm.eeEnglish
        31·
        7 days ago

        I want to switch over further but so far I’ve had so much else going on that data privacy hasn’t taken a priority. Things are getting weird now so it is time for a priority change.

    • cley_faye@lemmy.worldEnglish
      812·
      7 days ago

      Frankly speaking, calling out Google and Chrome, then moving to Firefox while Mozilla have been doing it’s best Google impression for years now is not that great of a plan.

      I wonder how long Firefox will be ok with all that, since Mozilla bought that advertisement business a while ago.

      • JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        18·
        7 days ago

        The main problem is that building a web browser is extremely difficult and everyone else uses Google’s version of WebKit. So there’s no alternatives: it’s either Google or Mozilla. Forks don’t count because if some functionality that end users need is deprecated, nobody will maintain it and it will just disappear once it’s removed from the main codebase

        • cley_faye@lemmy.worldEnglish
          61·
          6 days ago

          Yes, I agree. That’s why I’m weirded out by people saying “Firefox bad, use Librewolf” and the like.

          I still think a solution that relies on donation (maybe with some corporate support) would be very good for everyone involved. Unfortunately, Mozilla is not a player in this, so we’re stuck with basically three engines, one that can’t be used, one that’s openly hostile, and one that’s becoming hostile.

          Not great.

          • 3laws@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            6 days ago

            You just described Servo. It will happen. The Linux Foundation is backing it up now… after Mozilla dropped it.

        • uis@lemm.eeEnglish
          13·
          6 days ago

          building a web browser is extremely difficult and everyone else uses Google’s version of WebKit

          To be fair it is based on KHTML. One of projects KDE can spend that extra money on and resurrect.

          • boonhet@lemm.eeEnglish
            5·
            6 days ago

            Bring back Konqueror too while at it!

            Edit: Apparently it still exists, it just isn’t the default on any mainstream distros anymore

          • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
            31·
            6 days ago

            Saying KHTML = WebKit is like saying a sponge is a killer whale.

  • hungprocess@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    891·
    7 days ago

    FWIW I’m not seeing this on the Play Store for Firefox 136.0.1 on my Pixel 8a, and I’m not seeing any warnings on Beta or Nightly either:

    • Buffalox@lemmy.worldEnglish
      42·
      7 days ago

      This is not at all a pot kettle situation, there is no reason to warn about Firefox.

      • Renohren@lemmy.todayEnglish
        11·
        6 days ago

        There is: default search results on FF have always legally been sold to Google, the public didn’t know since there were no terms of service or mention by FF whenever they uploaded the android version on the playstore that their users data would be collected and some be sold. Position is one of the data that may be sold as it could be used by Google to dermine which localised version of the search result is the best one to serve

        And it’s not going to be Google in the future: it could be Bing, startpage, ecosia, qwant etc… As long as someone pays, then the results are sold and there needs to be a warning to users.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          6 days ago

          the public didn’t know

          That’s not true, for many years Firefox was basically financed by Google for being the default search engine, because Google didn’t want Microsoft to monopolize Internet Browsers. Everybody who had the slightest interest knew that.

          But that’s completely irrelevant, it’s a very marginal source of revenue today, and Firefox does not sell user info to Google. So it’s on Google to warn about using Google search.
          The only reason for the change in Firefox privacy terms was for clarification. For instance any information given to Firefox, does not grant Firefox ownership of it. (opposite of for instance Facebook)
          That’s a guarantee of user protection, not the opposite. Firefox has a very limited scope of “using” user data, like for instance storing links with Firefox, so they work across multiple devices.
          There is no “harvesting” of user behavior or information.

          https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/03/mozilla-rewrites-firefoxs-terms-of-use-after-user-backlash/

  • IZZI@mander.xyzEnglish
    362·
    6 days ago

    Deactivate from settings Have https always on, protection against tracking on strict, data collection and daily ping on off.

    And that’s it.

  • SynonymousStoat@lemmy.worldEnglish
    453·
    7 days ago

    Pretty easy to disable the location app permission or set it to ask every time. Firefox hasn’t asked me to enable it since turning it off.

    • Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      17·
      7 days ago

      Yeah I’m pretty sure Firefox won’t ask for or use your location, unless a website wants it for some reason (which is almost never a good one).

      • kuneho@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        7 days ago

        and even then, for me at least, the dialog that pops up is broken and lot of times the “Allow” button literally does nothing

    • Monstrosity@lemm.eeEnglish
      37·
      7 days ago

      Didn’t they also elude to collecting telemetry recently? I know it’s up for some debate but, if true, I’m not sure that’s a thing we can turn off.