Hacker News Reader

Comment by vuldin | Hacker News Reader

How is the integration of Pocket in any way similar to the Mr. Robot scenario? You just pointed to a recent article where they are explaining exactly the what/why/how details of this integration. There is nothing surprising or being hidden about this integration, and it's been a long time coming if you have paid attention to the beta/nightly/dev channels.

View on HN

My issue with the Pocket integration is that it's non-removeable - you get it whether you want it or not, and even if you remove the button from the toolbar, the code is still there within Firefox. You can't remove it like a plugin. To me, it adds another security problem that can only be fixed with an update of the whole browser, and you don't have the option not to have it.

But as I said, Mozilla were very up-front with the plans. They weren't with Looking Glass.

Pocket is literally only a plugin internally.

Setting the extensions.pocket.enabled variable to false will disable the addon. That's all there is to it.

Which leads nicely into my thought - then why not make it a plugin? Why not have the browser ship with Pocket as a plugin, thereby giving users the option to completely remove it?

That's a good question and I think Mozilla simply intents to make Pocket something that people choose Firefox over Chrome for (atleast the vast majority of mainstream users). They're also heavily working on improving it's privacy impact, which is already fairly low if you don't use it at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com