Hacker News Reader

Comment by kerng | Hacker News Reader

This is cool, will install. Maybe Firefox embraces this idea and adopts the fork.

That would certainly make it easier to trust this extension. I'm curious why Mozilla would ship a Facebook container but not a Google container.

Because Google pays a lot of money to Mozilla?

Then an interesting question is IF the Facebook container stemmed from principles 4 & 5 from the Mozilla Manifesto applied to the dominant social utility; is there a reason other than money that the same principles would not lead to a decision to build an add-on that gives people an option to contain Google? It's certainly not a technical limitation.

It seems natural to posit that money is the issue but is it so easy to believe that a foundation most of us trust would compromise its core values?

As mentioned elsewhere hacky add-ons cannot be the end solution, and will not be widely adopted unless incorporated as defaults.

I suspect its because containing Google hinders the web experience for people more than containing Facebook would. People have mentioned in threads here that Capchas would become frequent, Google login (which probably is more common than Facebook login) wouldn't work. The addon would make the browser of an average Joe worse than Facebook containers. And when Mozilla is grasping at straws, trying to win back market share, it'll have to really debate whether or not they would want to go forward with this.

Doesn't help that FB is getting a bad rep these days and its more mainstream to hate on it.

Unfortunately, that would be biting the hand that feeds.

Do you think the anti-tracking measures (specifically blocking third party cookies by default) in Firefox 65 is bad for Google?

Possibly, but that's an untargeted and justifiable privacy feature in a browser who's primary shtick is being privacy focused.

I think if Mozilla included code that specifically targets Google, they would be crossing a line.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com