I believe LibreWolf’s defaults are too strict and slow down adoption. Most options are either : all or nothing. No in-between.
Sadly, I believe the default settings are too strict and will slow down adoption by the mass, which would in term bring a better anonymity set.
It’s not a great alternative to Firefox because LibreWolf is just not usable for the daily user: no DRM, no cookies, no history, websites that break… The browser should let the user choose:
- Maximum compatibility (more tracking)
- Mid-option (like a modded firefox but without the annoyances like cookies not being stored, having a fixed size, or forced light-mode/timezone)
- Best privacy (pretty much the current mode)
I find myself forced to edit the default settings which is a huge privacy/fingerprinting risk. If we create ‘settings groups’, yes, the privacy will be hurt, but at least we will be more in each group.
What do you think about this?
I don’t care about adoption line go up, and I agree with Mozilla’s founder that adding DRM to Firefox was Mozilla’s original sin.
At the end of the day, I just want a better for privacy browser than Firefox and Brave, without having to fight with it so it works the way I want it to
The defaults and strict options just makes me feel like it’s not a user-friendly browser. It doesn’t let me have the browser I want to use, but rather someone else’s vision of the browser
Yes, it is someone else’s vision of a browser, and evidently wasn’t made for users like you. As the saying goes, what do you want for nothing, your money back?