Hi there,We posted a blog post this morning on a proposal for user personalization in Firefox:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mozilla-labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mozilla-labs...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mozill...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla-labs.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
I think this is tremendously exciting.The big questions for me are, how are the interests determined? Is it something that happens transparently / implicitly from usage, or drawn from a profile somewhere that a user maintains?Speaking for myself, I'd love it if this could read from interests I publish on my IndieWeb site, or from resources I control (profiles on various sites, etc). I tell Firefox where my profile is, and it does the legwork to determine my interests (in the case of the IndieWeb, from microformats). In other words, I'm not locked into using Firefox to maintain my interests; Firefox is, instead, locked into checking the web resources of my choice. For me, that's my own site. For others, that might be their Facebook profile, etc etc etc.
On Thursday, July 25, 2013 8:08:18 AM UTC-7, Justin Scott wrote:Hi there,We posted a blog post this morning on a proposal for user personalization in Firefox:https://blog.mozilla.org/labs/2013/07/a-user-personalization-proposal-for-firefox/
(see also https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2013/07/25/up-with-people/ )We're excited to hear your thoughts about it.Justin
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Ben Werdmuller <ben...@gmail.com> wrote:At a high level, the type of data Firefox can share is any data it has
> The big questions for me are, how are the interests determined?
access to. In our prototypes, we locally analyze existing Firefox
data, e.g., browsing history and form data, that users expect browsers
to have to provide features like history search and form fill. But
this doesn't prevent us having Firefox aggregate additional data
(perhaps at different granularity than URLs) such as your suggestion
of microformats or content on pages.
One thing we've been balancing is making sure users can understand the
data that they're sharing, so any time we add additional data sources,
we want to keep things transparent and controllable. It could be
tricky for users to act on completely opaque profiles imported from
> I tell Firefox where my profile is, and it does the legwork to determine my interestsWould you expect Firefox to somehow map/convert the referenced profile
into a "Firefox profile" or would it be a local copy of your profile
from the external source? Or perhaps Firefox provides a link to that
original profile reference?
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "mozilla-labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla-labs/shl-hL-hquI/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to mozilla-labs...@googlegroups.com.
Knee-jerk, good sir, means without thought. In case you knew this definition, I would like to compare your comment with mine in both quantity and quality to show you that your comment has less thought than mine. I haven't replied until now because your comment is so vague it is hard to tell whether it is directed at me. Accordingly, my comment now will focus on the presumption that it is.
First, my comment is quantitatively longer, so obviously there was more thought put into it, unless you count what you have to say between your lines, which does not amount to much anyway. Second, my comment is more thoughtful in quality, for if Mozilla does not "...affect the (currently existing) tracking mechanism used by sites)..." then there would be no point in calling Mozilla's proposition here a privacy enhancement (as they have stated) because we would just be sending advertisers even more personal identifiable information, not less. So, the User Personalization Proposal would either have to totally replace the "currently existing tracking mechanism" or leave the option for users to disable it if they choose to use the new User Personalization Proposal.
If you called my comment knee-jerk because I happened to mention porn (again, you are too vague to tell), let me remind you, that Private Browsing was first put in to keep people from viewing their browsing history (one of the reasons being to not let others know they watch porn), so obviously this has to do in at least some way with porn because this User Personalization Proposal is like Private Browsing for the server side of things; whereas, the actual Private Browsing users engage in now is directed at the client. Don't get me wrong, what Mozilla is proposing sounds like a huge undertaking, but they've taken on huge projects before to make the web a more open and private place, so this is another one of those big projects.
Good luck Mozilla, sincerely.