this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
609 points (82.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

27358 readers
1469 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 313 points 5 days ago (7 children)

Important context!

They had to change this because newer laws like the CCPA classify some ways of transferring/processing data as a "sale", even if no money is exchanged.

See: this Firefox FAQ where they say:

The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

Similar privacy laws exist in other US states, including in Virginia and Colorado. And that’s a good thing — Mozilla has long been a supporter of data privacy laws that empower people — but the competing interpretations of do-not-sell requirements does leave many businesses uncertain about their exact obligations and whether or not they’re considered to be “selling data.”

In order to make Firefox commercially viable, there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar. We set all of this out in our privacy notice. Whenever we share data with our partners, we put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share is stripped of potentially identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

We’re continuing to make sure that Firefox provides you with sensible default settings that you can review during onboarding or adjust at any time.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 66 points 5 days ago (1 children)

As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

Yes. That is selling. If you exchange customer data for money or other valuables, that is the definition of "selling".

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 60 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Not in all cases.

As an example, Firefox has the option of sponsored results, which send anonymized technical data when a link is clicked, essentially just saying "hey, this got an ad click, add it to the total." It doesn't send info about you, your identity, or your other browsing habits.

This counts as a "sale" even though no actual identifying information about you was exchanged. They mention this in the paragraphs I attached, when they talk about data sent via OHTTP.

I don't think any reasonable person would consider a packet being sent saying "some unknown user, somewhere in the world clicked your sponsored post" as "selling your personal information", but that's how the CCPA could be used to classify it, so to avoid getting in legal trouble, Firefox can't technically say that they "never sell your data", even if that's the extent of it.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago (3 children)

This counts as a “sale” even though no actual identifying information about you was exchanged. They mention this in the paragraphs I attached, when they talk about data sent via OHTTP.

I mean... it should count as a sale, because it's a sale. They are selling information about browsing habits for money. Regardless of whether they include identifying information, it is still personal data that they are selling. They removed that line from their FAQs because they changed their minds about selling personal data. It has fuck all to do with weird legal definitions. They promised they wouldn't ever sell personal data, and then they were like "wellll......"

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 28 points 5 days ago (8 children)

"Selling personal data" and "selling ads that we can tell if they are clicked by an anonymous user" are completely different, in my eyes at least.

"Selling personal data" sounds like someone taking your personally identifiable information and giving it to someone for money. What they're doing isn't that, so they're not "selling personal data"

They're selling ad views, not your information.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

That data is about as personal as someone sitting in a park keeping a tally of how many people with a blue jacket walk by. "Somebody posted a comment on lemmy" is not the same as "@elbucho@lemmy.world posted a comment on lemmy".

Particularly if you opt out (as I have) and no tally mark is added for you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jve@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Which is convenient, because now when they decide they do want to sell your data, it’s fine because their privacy policy doesn’t say it anymore!

Man. I want to root for Mozilla, but they are definitely looking down the barrel of enshittification.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago (3 children)

But I don’t want them doing that. I don’t want my browser sharing any of my browsing activity, anonymized or not.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 27 points 5 days ago

And they clarify that you can choose to have them not do that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 35 points 5 days ago

Thank you. I was hoping this would be among the top upvoted comments.

[–] blind3rdeye@aussie.zone 25 points 5 days ago (3 children)

The text you quoted sounds like a reasonable and normal definition of a sale to me. i.e. transferring to another business in exchange for something else of value.

So yeah, Firefox previously promised not to do this, "not ever", and now they say they need to do sell your personal data "in order to make Firefox commercially viable".

But hang on a second... Firefox is not a commercial product. So making it 'commercially viable' is highly questionable in itself.


It's a shame that Mozilla's current leadership is more interested in self-enrichment than in the past. But Firefox is still the very best option by far. I hope that the Ladybird project becomes strong the future, if for no other reason than pressure Firefox into staying good.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ITGuyLevi@programming.dev 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

All those things they listed I would also consider selling my data. Even if you are offering my info in exchange for peanut butter cookies, you are trading it for something else.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] oktux@beehaw.org 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

This isn't reassuring. They're saying they don't receive money for my personal data, but they do give it to other businesses in exchange for something valuable. To me, that's selling my data.

That said, I do appreciate the context.

Edit: I also appreciate the work Mozilla is doing, and in fact I am a monthly donor.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 263 points 5 days ago (12 children)
[–] underscores@lemmy.zip 114 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Theo is a shill and product expert masquerading as a 10x developer when at best he's an intermediate web dev

[–] tyler@programming.dev 47 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Not even intermediate. He makes so many bad calls that it’s honestly great to watch him to know what not to do. You’ll be right about 95+% of the time.

I had to stop watching him though because I’d spend hours writing up comments to correct everything he said.

[–] underscores@lemmy.zip 14 points 5 days ago

I realized when he was talking about mongodb and completely failed to understand the issue he had with it was strictly a design issue created by the team he worked with (or potentially by him)

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 75 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yes we all know mozilla sucks, still ff is the best browser by far

[–] lauha@lemmy.world 27 points 5 days ago (5 children)
[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 29 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Wayyyyyyy lesser.

We're talking Mussolini versus your local grocery store clerk who's a dick sometimes.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 63 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Didn't Firefox just release a new feature that prevents fingerprinting? Hard to get a reading on Mozilla these days.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 204 points 5 days ago (10 children)

It's because people looked at a line of a diff without looking at the actual context.
It's like finding the line in a diff where someone deleted a call to "check password" and concluding that this means the service is no longer verifying passwords.

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/faq/

We never sell your personal data. Unlike other big tech companies that collect and profit off your personal information, we’re built with privacy as the default. We don’t know your age, gender, precise location, or other information Big Tech collects and profits from.

Basically, they consolidated and clarified their data privacy policies to be legally accurate. People took a content change to be a policy change on the assumption that you can't just delete words in one place and put new ones somewhere else.

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 68 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ha. I'd expect nothing less from Theo.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Feyd@programming.dev 62 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (12 children)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] TheGreenWizard@lemmy.zip 39 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Fuck that guy, all he does is make ragebait

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 38 points 5 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 5 days ago

Reminds me of the time Google decided that "Don't be evil" wasn't their vibe any more.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 28 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Theo to me had the same energy as Pirate Software. One of these days there's gonna be some cancelling, someone mark these words.

[–] EmilyIsTrans@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It's been a while since I watched his content, but isn't most of his stuff just clips of him reading back someone else's article at you with inane commentary added in between?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 26 points 5 days ago
[–] nocteb@feddit.org 12 points 5 days ago

throw std::future_error(std::make_error_code(std::future_errc::broken_promise));

load more comments
view more: next ›