Firefox 3.0 may block sites fingered by Google.

[John.Michael.Kane]

computerworld (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9023520&source=rss_news10)

Thoughts or Concerns?

[steeleyuk]

First, im sure that if they do add this feature you will be able to disable it.
Second, if it stops the old lady down the road from downloading malware and Trojans onto her computer it is a good thing.

Of course theres always a chance of false-positives, etc but I think thats a minor worry compared to the potential number of problems it may reduce.

[racoq]

First, im sure that if they do add this feature you will be able to disable it.
Second, if it stops the old lady down the road from downloading malware and Trojans onto her computer it is a good thing.

Of course theres always a chance of false-positives, etc but I think thats a minor worry compared to the potential number of problems it may reduce.

I'm using Gran Paradiso on daily basis and haven't noted any difference yet.
But i agree with steeleyuk, we will certainly have an option of disabling, if it is implemented in the browser, and enabled by default (which i seriously doubt)

[starcraft.man]

Uh..... I think its best to wait for it to actually be released before we start worrying about anything. Things can change a lot in a short time.

[cunawarit]

Overall a good thing, I'm pretty certain you'll be able to turn it off, and if you aren't keep in mind it is open source so anyone is free to remove the feature.

As for:

"What we are actually doing here is giving Google veto power over any Web page. Hmm ..."

I share those concerns, but it isn't much different to the current situation where Google decides your Google ranking, and much of that is also a secret.

[cunawarit]

Personally I think the online world is a savage badland, as well as a blissful utopia.

Those who want it, deserve a certain level of protection. Let's remember that not everyone is as online savy as a computer science gradute.

[slimdog360]

fingered, hahahahaha

[Sunflower1970]

I'm using Gran Paradiso on daily basis and haven't noted any difference yet.
But i agree with steeleyuk, we will certainly have an option of disabling, if it is implemented in the browser, and enabled by default (which i seriously doubt)

Have been using Firefox 3 alpha 6pre daily build (named Minefield...and they sure chose a good name for it...Minefield it is haha--Gran Paradiso was much more stable..but I knew the risks) ...As long as there's a way to turn it off, I wouldn't mind...Might have to stop using Minefield if this is implemented in one of the nightly builds before July 1st...I can see a real minefield appear my computer then...(lol)

[Luggy]

computerworld (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9023520&source=rss_news10)

Thoughts or Concerns?

This article is based primarily on rumours and hear say. Ideas can be talked about but it does not mean they will be implemented.

Don't worry about it yet.

[prizrak]

It's a pretty good feature for alot of people I know. As long as it can be disabled there is no problem.

[areteichi]

Even if these controversies arise on software, it hardly worries me since firefox is a free software. I know developers with the right minds are the ones making the software and not an imaginary person called a 'corporation' whose mind only computes by the gain or loss of money.

[bobbocanfly]

In theory this is a good feature and if it is implemented will be for the good of the average user, and that is what everyone on here wants, more normal (IE non computer science graduates etc.) people using OSS.

Anyway if it is implemeted you will definately be able to remove it in about:config. You can do pretty much anything in that.

[zugu]

Even if the feature is hardcoded in Firefox, it's FOSS, so people would fork it. Really, why are we discussing this kind of issues?

Also, what's wrong with having Google filtering malicious websites? If I really want to visit a website, I can do it, with or without Firefox.