https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/

They can interpret that however they want. For example, you can always "shape the Internet and [your] own experiences on it", including removing any blocking, adding things they remove, etc... just get the source code for Firefox and make all the changes you want.

It's all a bunch of vague marketing doublespeak anyway, with around as much power over what Mozilla does as the US constitution has on the US government.

As it stands you're spreading FUD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

or (to play coy): you're suggesting we block fiction from the internet...?

Remember also that almost everyone selects their email provider precisely because they don't want to see everything - they want someone to take care of the spam for them. Popup blocking, ad blocking, and now it seems some sort of "clickbait"/"fake news"/"russian troll" blocking is going to be popular.

now. who gets to arbitrate what is "political"? who gets to arbitrate what is "fiction"? who gets to arbitrate someone else's "intent"?

Clinton? Trump? Bezos? Huffington? pick your poison. and i'll find half a country that disagrees with you.

signed,

a very confused liberal

I’m not interested in arguing about whether objectivity is possible in news, just saying this distinction is important.

https://gizmodo.com/that-viral-photo-of-president-trump-dump...

an honest question, do your content police block CNN for this one article? if yes, i respect your consistency but i think CNN deserves some forgiveness. if no, why not? what is the threshold? any threshold is just A SECOND slippery slope.

> The first is an attempt to mislead people about events that have happened

i see. and who gets to decide what has happened? CNN or FOX? Google or Mozilla?

i think... show me a group capable of political objectivity, invulnerable to influence, and i can start to come around.

Which content police did I propose? I simply pointed out that you're conflating political fiction (eg George Orwell's 1984) with fake news (eg this story from "American News dot com": https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-google-crack...).

> http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/politics/donald-trump-koi-pond...

Was this video you posted from CNN fake? Was someone fabricating that or did it really happen? It's a very dumb story (and one of the reasons I don't bother with CNN), but I don't get the sense that it was fabricated.

Yes, news sources have political slants, I doubt you'll find anyone to argue with you on that one. The clickbaitization of news continues to ruin journalism, and I'd really like to reverse the trend. However, that's a different issue than the problem I pointed out with your argument.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became...

Are you also against spam filters, virus scanners, security certificate warnings, mixed content warnings, and known malware domain click-throughs?

A vastly bigger problem than fake news, is how we've all sat on our collective asses as Democratic and Republican parties have sabotaged voting districts with gerrymandering and the Electoral College by giving those seats to party loyalists, not better people.

This is not at all the system we have. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp

As for how they'd decide what websites to block or put a warning in front of, that seems fairly straightforward. Have a committee that represents different demographics, and require a unanimous vote to take action against a site.

you want a company or government to decide what content gets blocked. that is what's partisan.

remember this conversation when the guy you don't like gets control of that company or government. cheers mate. i mean well.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://phys.org/news/2017-08-mozilla-fact-checker-fake-news...

(Apologies for the awful link source, I can't find a primary AFP link. Several other sites that have published the same identical story.)

Full Fact does appear to be a real organization, they claim to already work with the BBC, Guardian & other media partners, as well as Google. Some of the controversy seems to be over their grant funding from Omidyar Network and an organization founded by George Soros. (Whether that's a reason for concern, I have no idea.)

https://fullfact.org/blog/2017/jun/automated-fact-checking-f...

https://fullfact.org/blog/2017/jun/awarded-500000-omidyar-ne...

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/08/fake-news...

Edit: Misread, thought OP was talking about Google not Mozilla.

Mozilla is doing research into this, and may eventually release some tooling for this (an addon or something). But we don't even help block ads in the browser, I doubt this will be built in.

Indeed, whatever happened to "don't take sides". Couldn't an organisation stay completely neutral and only focus its efforts on the technology of accessing websites?

1 can largely be solved with effort (just about) but last I checked Fastmail doesnt use the same vcard formats as Google/Apple and doesnt support custom fields in contacts. That might have changed recently and I'd be very interested to look again if it has.

I even went as far as a fairly engaged back and forth with Fastmail support (reference to which is in my comment history somewhere here) to work out how they could get bi-directional syncing of custom fields to both platforms working. But they had no plans to implement it.

I appreciate mine is perhaps a niche use case but I've got a lot of contacts with multiple addresses and numbers in multiple countries and short of saving maybe 5 or 6 replica contact entries per individual (which is a mess over) the workable solution was to stay within a walled garden.

1. Set up an email client and get into the habit of checking your mail from it instead of the web interface (at least, on your normal devices). 2. Create and start using your new email account, which you can add as a second email address in your client of choice, alongside your gmail. Share the new address with friends and family; people who you want to recieve mail from. 3. Gradually switch over logins and the rare newsletter you care about to the new address.

Eventually, you'll find that you no longer get any mail you care about on gmail. That's when you download an archive (which you think you will look at but actually never will) and delete your account. As a side benefit, you'll likely get to cut down the amount of junk mail you get :)

I've never used Google calendar, but I presume there's a way to export as ical? That should make it easy to migrate to any provider you like.

Fastmail has a decent calendar, but you may prefer to use iCloud or something else for that. Calendar clients on desktops and phones tend to be pretty good at supporting multiple providers so that is a lot easier to migrate.

I trust it because I can get it from 3rd-party repos — Debian, Fedora, F-Droid — and I trust that they wouldn't all allow malicious software that claims all communication is encrypted.

Syncthing's forum uses Discourse. The whole thing just smells of competence.

Of course, it may not suit you.