LWD

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (8 children)

So your logic would say Mozilla should require all Firefox Beta users to submit to mandatory data collection?

The only consistent through line I see with your reasoning is adherence to what Mozilla preaches from on high. And that concerns me, because Mozilla's ethics have continued tumbling downwards since they started collecting data at all in 2017.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

If you're talking about the distillations, AFAIK they take somebody else's model and run it through their (actually open-source) distiller. I tried a couple of those models because I was curious. The distilled Qwen model is cagey about Tianmen Square, but Qwen was made by Alibaba. The distillation of a US-made model did not have this problem.

(Edit: we're talking about these distillations, right? If somebody else ran a test and posted it online, I'm not privy to it.)

I don't have enough RAM to run the full DeepSeek R1, but AFAIK it doesn't have this problem. Maybe it does.

In case it isn't clear, BTW, I do despise LLMs and AI in general. The biggest issue with their lies (leaving aside every other issue with them for a moment) isn't the glaringly obvious stuff. Not Tianmen Square, and certainly not the "it's woke!" complaints about generating images of black founding fathers. The worst lies are the subtle and insidious little details like agreeableness - trying to get people to spend a little more time with them, which apparently turns once-reasonable people into members of micro-cults. Like cults, perhaps, spme skeptics think they can join in and not fall for the BS... And then they do.

All four students had by now joined their chosen groups... Hugh had completely disappeared into a nine-week Arica training seminar; he was incommunicado and had mumbled something before he left about “how my energy has moved beyond academia.”

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (3 children)

What exactly makes this more "open source" than DeepSeek? The linked page doesn't make that particularly clear.

DeepSeek doesn't release their training data (but they release a hell of a lot of other stuff), and I think that's about as "open" as these companies can get before they risk running afoul of copyright issues. Since you can't compile the model from scratch, it's not really open source. It's just freeware. But that's true for both models, as far as I can tell.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (5 children)

DeepSeek imposes similar restrictions, but only on their website. You can self-host and then enjoy relatively truthful (as truthful as a bullshit generator can be) answers about both Tianmen Square, Palestine, and South Africa (something American-made bullshit generators apparently like making up, to appease their corporate overlords or conspiracy theorists respectively).

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

Edit:

this site is mostly ads now

  • Only 4 of the original 22 options are still on the homepage
  • Two (50%) are hosted via sponsor CloudBreak
  • One (25%) is hosted via sponsor Sunya
  • The "get started" links mostly (75%) point to Stripe checkout pages

OP, is this a joke?


Sponsored, using affiliate links and accepting donations? Somebody better fork this guide before the GitHub gets yanked

Edit: Okay, after looking around at this, something seems... off. Linking to getoffpocket.com?by=lemmy was odd already, but then I noticed that every single service here appears to have a referral link. Even the OneNote link has a referral code stapled onto it:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/onenote/digital-note-taking-app?rby=getoffpocket.com%2Fproprietary%2Fmicrosoft-onenote%2F

For some reason, those same UTM links are used for everything, including links to GitHub?
How about no extra query parameters at all?

I'm also surprised there's not even a passing mention to Obsidian and Evernote.

I think I'll stick to searching out my own recs on AlternativeTo

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (10 children)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

deleted by creator

 

I recently downloaded Firefox Nightly and noticed some new settings that were enabled by default:

  • Suggestions from Firefox Nightly
    Get suggestions from the web related to your search
  • Suggestions from sponsors
    Support Firefox Nightly with occasional sponsored suggestions

Learn more about Firefox Suggest

The link in the UI doesn't mention sponsorships anywhere. But this page does:

Who are Mozilla’s partners for sponsored suggestions?

We partner with organizations to serve up some of these suggestion types... For sponsored results, we primarily work with adMarketplace, while also providing non-sponsored results from Wikipedia.

This page links to the adMarketplace Privacy Policy which makes it pretty clear this company is okay with collecting your IP address and passing it to further unnamed entities.

Elsewhere, they say Firefox sends them "the number of times Firefox suggests or displays specific content and your clicks on that content, as well as basic data about your interactions with Firefox Suggest", and then will share interaction information "in an aggregate manner with our partners".


Update: Switched the link from the Desktop to the Mobile version. Added more quotes from FF, and bolded info about their one named AdTech partner.

-2
deleted (www.google.com)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
6
deleted (i.imgur.com)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Done in Boost.

 

Today, when I navigated to amazon.com on Firefox for Android, I received a jarring message that I could "try" a new service, Fakespot, on the app.

Fakespot is littered with privacy issues.

Among other things, FakeSpot/Mozilla was forced to admit:
"We sell and share your personal information"

Fakespot's privacy policy allows them to store and/or sell:

  • Your email address
  • Your IP address
  • "Protected chacteristics"
    ie gender, sexuality, race...
  • Data scraped from across the web
  • Account IDs
  • Things you bought
    (This is sold to advertisers)
  • Things you considered buying
    (This is sold to advertisers)
  • Your precise location
    (This is sold to advertisers)
  • Inferences about you
    (This is sold to advertisers)

Right before Mozilla acquired them, Fakespot updated their privacy policy to allow transfer of private data to any company that acquired them. (Previous Privacy Policy here. Search "merge" in both.)

People donate to Mozilla because they believe in the company's stated goals. Why were the donations put into an acquisition of a company with this kind of privacy policy? And why has Mozilla focused on bundling it as bloat into their browser? Now that Brave is in hot water for becoming bloated, Mozilla should buck the trend, not follow it.

-2
deleted (lemm.ee)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Today, when I navigated to amazon.com on Firefox for Android, I received a jarring message that I could "try" a new service, Fakespot, on the app.

What's Fakespot? A "review-checking, scammer-spotting service for Firefox."

Among other things, FakeSpot/Mozilla was forced to admit:
"We sell and share your personal information"

Fakespot's privacy policy allows them to collect and sell:

  • Your email address
  • Your IP address
  • Account IDs
  • A list of things you purchased and considered purchasing
  • Your precise location (which will be sent to advertising partners)
  • Data about you publicly available on the web
  • Your curated profile (which will also be sent to advertising providers)

Right before Mozilla acquired them, Fakespot updated their privacy policy to allow transfer of private data to any company that acquired them. (Previous Privacy Policy here. Search "merge" in both.)

Who asked for this? Who demanded integration into Firefox, since it was already a (relatively unpopular) browser extension people could have used instead?

view more: ‹ prev next ›