Floorp, a Firefox Fork with an awful name, has moved some components inside a private submodule.
Aatube@kbin.melroy.org to 
github.com
See also https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/floorp-going-closed-source/52783
Edit: They claim they will make that part open source too, eventually, and it is due to behavior of another browser: https://github.com/Floorp-Projects/Floorp-core/issues/62
Edit 2: They just open sourced the private repository 7 minutes ago, 2024-03-24T12:39Z
You are viewing a single comment
Besides Tor, I'm yet to see a Firefox fork that makes sense
Librewolf, their devs seem hella inactive but their builds are automated. Tbh I would prefer a working arkenfox more. Made my own softening and install script but its pre-alpha and I will likely rewrite it again in some time.
Check out Mullvad Browser. It’s created in partnership with the Tor Browser, but optimized to be used for the Clearnet. You don’t need to use Mullvad’s VPN with it either.
Personally I use Waterfox because of its built-in theme preferences, e.g. auto-hiding the tab bar and sidebar headers.
Is Waterfox still owned by the advertising company?
No, (Captain Obvious,) and I never really got the fuss around that in the first place.
You don’t understand why an ad company owning a “privacy focused” browser is a problem?
I can check the commits.
Do you? Genuinely, not trying to snark. I see this point lots, but Im skeptical that people actually do.
As a dev, I read plenty of commits, and the idea of voluntarily prodding through commits on a FOSS project is just not happening. I'd rather just trust the dev, and the community to pick through the code in my place. The obvious issue being, what if everyone also does that.
In fact, sometimes! Sometimes I check GitHub's difference between tags and open commits with commit summaries too vague on the first page. Yeah, it's pretty much just a basic scan, but since it's open source I don't think they'll be brave enough to do things too nefarious and hidden, which like the bystander effect you've said, I feel like will come to light anyway. Hell, someone somehow managed to find furry porn in Thorium.
Huh, TIL.
https://www.waterfox.net/blog/a-new-chapter-for-waterfox/
The relevant, 2023-07-03:
Icecat, a Firefox fork without Firefox's privacy issues (telemetry).
Out of curiosity, in which ways are telemetry privacy issues and how does Icecat solve them in a way in which NextDNS doesn't?
By default Firefox collects data and sends it to their server, which Icecat doesn't. I don't want having to use another service like NextDNS to protect me against the application that I want to be able to trust because I'm using it for a lot of personal data.
From the mozilla website itself:
Identification:
And then the data that I don't want to share with other entities:
Even without NextDNS, what data is it that's being collected that's so bad?
Every website and app sees your IP address and has done since forever. Intersections like number of tabs, number of web pages, installed add-ons are how features are developed and resources assigned.
You can turn off the sponsored links.
Technical information is again, good housekeeping.
Did you ever watch House MD? Remember how he used to say everybody lies and so would look for hard evidence? That's telemetry. They need to know what's happening in order to make the best browser possible, because the alternative is just doing what the people who shout the loudest want and that didn't work out too well for them.
There's certainly a trade-off by not having Telemetry, and I prefer privacy over some "slightly better development". It is not necessary for good development.
Websites collect information, but I expect that in a public space, and also aggregating information across websites isn't so easy. However, I have higher expectations for my web browser. When something is installed on my laptop, it's like my house, and I don't want anything to access my private space without permission.
Even worse, Firefox has it implemented as Opt-Out. Telemetry by default and without asking the user isn't good practice. At the very least, they should give users a choice before enabling it. Yet, they collect everyone's IP address and other information at least once when you start up Firefox for the first time. This doesn't deserve my trust.
I don't want to play a game of 'what do I need to opt-out for privacy' with an entity that I need to trust. Why would I use Firefox if Icecat gives me the level of trust that I need. It's a personal choice.
To be honest, I find your standpoint immature, naive, ignorant and selfish. But there's clearly forks that cater to your mindset, so enjoy them.
Privacy always comes at a cost. We are all different and have varying preferences based on our experiences and perspectives. Deciding how much privacy one wants to give up for convenience or other benefits is a personal choice. There's no need to judge others for that decision. To each their own.
Privacy is great and we all make sacrifices to achieve it. But there's privacy and there's malicious paranoia.
Let's look at Mozilla and Firefox. Once upon a time they were doing well, really well in fact, to the point that they toppled a hegemon. They were a breath of fresh air in a formerly Internet Explorer world.
However things didn't last. A new competitor came forward and abused its new monopoly to get skin in the game, but for the most part actually made a better browser.
Mozilla asked its fanbase what it should do and a vocal minority spoke up. Mozilla focused on those things and people left for what had become a better browser.
Mozilla looked at how the competitor improved and realised the value of data driving decisions, they had said data as opt-in and hardly anyone opted in. Though this is something commonly known. Eventually Mozilla, in order to stay competitive, made it opt out and as a result, with tonnes more data and a better understanding, started making changes that improved Firefox and once more made it competitive.
Unfortunately for Mozilla, there are some organizations that abuse telemetry and so the connotations are of a giant privacy nightmare. Mozilla enables users to see all the data that is sent, but connotations are hard to overcome.
Now with all that in mind, Mozilla's the last bastion of freedom. It's in charge of the last non Google or Apple major rendering engine and some of the same people that acknowledge its vitally important, are unwilling to do their part to ensure its survival.
The goal of Mozilla is a free Internet and in order to provide that, they need an important browser. But there are people that refuse to contribute their telemetry, so said rendering engine doesn't register. The browser can't improve, it looks like they're not using the rendering engine and they don't donate. They're essentially just being leeches, but they're protecting their privacy while sacrificing everyone else's.
It's like shooting everyone that walks on your road in order to protect your family.
I appreciate your detailed description of the probable benefits of telemetry. While I acknowledge there are benefits, however, before accepting a given set of telemetry, I would like to know with sources and in exact terms (not just 'improved UI') what enhancements were made to Firefox that couldn't be achieved without telemetry. I want to decide for myself if those features are truly important enough to justify sending my personal data to the developers. Only then can I make an informed decision, and it still wouldn't necessarily mean agreement. It's not paranoia; it's simply refusing telemetry for any reason given.
I hear and understand you. There's absolutely no way you should just blindly accept Telemetry. But there are companies that deserve your faith until they fuck up. Mozilla is one of them. It's also worth noting that they only keep Telemetry data for 1 year: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/telemetry-clientid#:~:text=Firefox%20collects%20telemetry%20data%20by,interaction%20data%20and%20technical%20data.
Curious, do you have some extension that makes Firefox support #:~:text?
Did the link not work for you?