Re:Can the new Firefox Quantum regain its web browser market...
by Silhouette on Friday November 24, 2017 @05:04PM
(#15773273)
Either way would render the experiment useless (self-selection bias).
But that is Mozilla's problem, not their users'.
As probably would be the legal position in many places, if news of this got out more widely and regulators started getting involved. It's hard to see how this wouldn't fall foul of even general EU data protection laws today, never mind anything stronger that is specific to Germany.
Re:Can the new Firefox Quantum regain its web browser market...
by dao- on Friday November 24, 2017 @05:28PM
(#15773357)
> But that is Mozilla's problem, not their users'.
Sure, I'm just telling you how we arrived at the current situation and why your proposed alternative is a nonstarter for an experiment that tries to figure out if this feature adds user value in the first place.
Re:Can the new Firefox Quantum regain its web browser market...
by daveFNbuck on Saturday November 25, 2017 @01:09AM
(#15774668)
If the warning is a hard requirement after the experiment, running an experiment without the opt-out warning biases your results. Having the warning in the experiment gives you a better picture of what happens to users when you present them the option.
Re:Can the new Firefox Quantum regain its web browser market...
by dao- on Saturday November 25, 2017 @01:55AM
(#15774786)
Except that the question that the experiment wants to answer isn't what happens when you present users with the option. That would only become relevant later. The question right now is whether Cliqz' address bar autocomplete results are superior to the status quo.
Either way would render the experiment useless (self-selection bias). Obviously if something like this should make it into Firefox proper, that would make something like an opt-out warning a hard requirement.