I was just going through the release notes to find out what you've inflicted on me lately, and I found this turkey.
People have already pointed out that this is being set based on OS settings that don't really indicate something like this should happen. Other people have pointed out that it silently changes the Web experience for people who haven't personally opted in, and that is a pretty questionable move ethically. And of course it's obvious that it's not that hard to circumvent this sort of thing. So I'll just add out that... First, this isn't going to communicate anything useful, since you don't define what's "safe" or "objectionable", and it's 100 percent guaranteed that the site's guess about that is going to differ from what the user who turned it on thought it would be. Sometimes radically. Of course, users who intentionally turned it on will be just the sort of people who *think* the whole world does or should share their opinions, so there ought to be some amusing fireworks. Second, this is going to get just about as much legitimate site adoption as do-not-track got. Why would you even dream that sites would bother with this? Third, the name buys into the foolish and dangerous idea that seeing something on a screen can be "unsafe". Fourth, you are signalling scam sites that a potentially gullible person may be on the other end of the line, and you are signalling troll sites that they can get a rise out of people by putting up "objectionable" content. I think I'll set up my own site to notice the header and redirect to instructions on evading parental controls. You guys need to stop wasting resources on obviously doomed non-features like this, stop making pointless UI changes all the time, and get to work on cleaning up the core code of your browser. When can I expect process-per-tab? When do you plan to go a whole release with no critical security bugs? _______________________________________________ dev-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-privacy
