Notices by Dan Veditz (dveditz@infosec.exchange)

@sj
There's a huge gulf between what Sarah is saying and your "Firefox turns into a keylogger" or Lunduke's "can use your data however it wants".

The "use" in the TOS is limited by the privacy policy which Sarah says right in that thread. Her complaint is the privacy policy is overly broad and vague and that's a perfectly fair thing to argue about (I have my own questions about what it means). But that's very different from "however [Mozilla] wants"

A "keylogger" is malware and a crime, and the accusation is offensive. You better have something stronger than a truncated sentence from the TOS to make that claim.

@sj
Does it say it can use it "however it wants"? No -- read the rest of the fucking sentence. It can use it to perform the functionality you've asked it to do.

@serapath @bbmin7b5 @root @mekkaokereke @james

"we should educate people" is doomed from the start. People don't need to use Mastodon for their job or to get government services. They are on socials for fun--they aren't going to take a class to learn how to make it work for them! Either it's easy and fun or it isn't.

"must show commitment to federation by putting up with broken shit" could be a valid entry requirement to keep out the shallow riff-raff if you want a more exclusive club. But you can't at the same time complain people would rather go somewhere else.

@cstross
The web of 1996 didn't pay much heed to the W3C, it was all about Netscape and Microsoft throwing non-standard features at each other trying to win ”the browser war”. Even if the W3C recommended micro transactions it would have gone nowhere unless one or both of them were interested in supporting it.

(Note to younger readers: both companies made money selling server solutions; the browsers were ”loss leaders” even before the price was driven to $0)