They already updated it to make the language clearer. This is the new version:

You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. This includes processing your data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice. It also includes a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox. This does not give Mozilla any ownership in that content.

And they removed the passage that states they will never sell your data

That’s because the definition of “sell data” varies by jurisdiction, so they can’t make that claim (nor can any company that uses ads). In particular, it’s very strict in California’s CCPA, and includes third parties using data for analytical purposes even if no payment is made.

Firefox don’t store everything you type though.

Honestly, people are overreacting to the ToS changes. Mozilla haven’t actually changed what they’re doing; they’re just removing text they legally can’t include since the definition of “selling data” varies by jurisdiction. It doesn’t always mean literally selling user data. California is very strict about it for example.

I usually use the “scaled” feed sorting algorithm instead of the default “active” one. It does a better job of showing a larger variety of posts, including posts from small communities.

I was pretty impressed with the Samsung Gear VR (and Google Cardboard before it) when it was first released back in 2015. Instead of having to spend a lot on a fancy computer system and headset to experience VR, you could just stick your phone close to your eyes. Of course, it wasn’t as good as an actual VR headset, but it was the first VR experience that was easily approachable for ‘regular’ people, and was a lot better than I thought it’d be.

Some people think the big tech companies literally sell your data though, so IMO it’s important to clarify.

There are companies that do that though, like Acxiom, LiveRamp, CoreLogic, etc. With Acxiom at least, you can buy lists like “high net worth individuals who are likely to buy a new car in the next 6 months” and get a list of names, phone numbers, and email addresses, based on data they’ve collected from both public and private sources.

Those data broker companies collect data from things like supermarket loyalty programs (to determine consumer spending patterns) and other companies who are willing to sell data about you, and compile them into profiles.

Advertisers don’t see any of the data though. What the companies are really selling is your attention.

For what it’s worth, Q4 always has higher ad revenue because of Black Friday and Christmas.

I think the cost per ad went up too (that’s also in the presentation). Google and Facebook both mostly use an auction system for ads, so the price is based on the market. Out of all the possible ads a user can see (active ads targeting their demographic), the one with the highest bid will be shown.

Take the superbowl for example. It’s usually the most viewed event every year in the US

Interesting that you mention the superbowl, since one of the techniques that sales reps at large digital ad networks (like Google and Facebook) use to sell ads to large advertisers is comparing it to the superbowl.

This year’s superbowl had a viewership of around 127 million people. In comparison, 194 million Americans use Facebook at least once per day and 267 million use Google, so your ads on those platforms will have a wider potential audience than the superbowl, while being much more cost effective since you can run the ad just to a more specific audience rather than having to run the ad to every single person watching TV at that time.

Around 97% of Meta’s revenue is from ads. 2.2% is from Reality Labs - things like Meta Quest headsets and Meta Ray Ban smart glasses. The remaining <0.7% is small things like fees from Facebook Marketplace (for orders that are shipped), a cut of credits for Facebook games (apparently that’s still a thing?), etc.

Meta is a public company so all this data is public. See slide #4 in the most recent earnings presentation slides here: https://investor.atmeta.com/investor-events/event-details/2025/Q4-2024-Earnings-Call/default.aspx

deleted by creator

selling your personal data

The major tech companies like Google, Facebook, etc don’t sell user data. That’s a common misconception. The data is what makes the company valuable - nobody else has it. It wouldn’t make sense for them to sell it, because they’d lose their competitive advantage over other companies.

Advertisers can target ads based on the data, but the advertiser never actually sees user data.

My wife and dog (a little tiny Chihuahua). Regardless of what happens in the world, they’ll be there for me, so I can take comfort in that at least. Married six years this year and adopted the dog four years ago.

deleted by creator

It’s about the same population as San Francisco.

San Jose metro area is enormous though. For example I’d consider Gilroy (which is famous for its garlic) as being completely separate from San Jose even though it’s well within San Jose’s metro area.

What do you consider small? A lot of people know Cupertino California because Apple are based there, but it’s only got a population of 57k. It’s arguably more recognizable than the closest major city (San Jose), which has a population of nearly 1 million.

850k isn’t really small though.

Self-synchronizes to GMT by passively receiving continent-spanning radio time signals.

Why don’t other watches do this?

I have a Galaxy S3 somewhere, which is apparently supported by PostmarketOS. Interesting.