Slashdot Mirror

Pocket Privacy Policy

Snippet 1:

We also use non-identifying, aggregated information to analyze the manner in which the Pocket Technologies are used, which also allows us to improve our services. The aggregated information we use includes the manner in which articles, videos, or content has been accessed, saved and shared.

And above it in a separate paragraph:

. The types of information we collect includes your browser type, device type, time zone, language, and other information related to the manner in which you access the Pocket Technologies. If you are on a mobile device, we collect the advertising identifiers provided by Apple on iOS and by Google on Android.

and in that same paragraph:

ou can change this identifier in your device settings. We also collect information about your use of the Pocket Technologies so that we can provide our services. For example, as a part of providing Pocket’s syncing features, we sync information about the items that you save and view within Pocket so that your list, tags, scroll position, and other account and usage information may be synced across all of your devices.

They are collecting this information and telling you they aren't going to use it for anything bad; this always results in they sell your information at some point. I find it *really* hard to believe it's anonymous, as on mobile devices it captures your advertising ID on iOS and Android.

There's a reason people wanted this to stay as an extension.

I don't value pockets functionality so i remove the icon. And I thought it was idiotic that it was integrated instead of left as a 3rd party extension.. but...

As far as I can tell, Pocket operates locally; while the pocket extension functionality in the browser does track you *locally*, its about as evil as the firefox "history" list, which is to say: not even slightly evil.

      Neither Mozilla nor Pocket receives a copy of your browser history. The entire process of sorting and filtering which stories you should see happens locally in your copy of Firefox.

https://help.getpocket.com/art...

Near as I can tell, the list of all pocket recommends is sent to you. Your local browser then filters and sorts the list by comparing it to that. Your history and preferences aren't sent to pocket in this process.

Read how it works for yourself. What part specifically do you object to? What am I missing?

*correction: full link: https://getpocket.com/redirect?&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Fblogs%2Fbuttonwood%2F2017%2F11%2Fgreater-fool-theory-0&h=f46558eae82843f2d97ae0f83b27d5c96431d25a77a4cce46b92217422addada&nt=b7fecU93gH942ym

So it appears the story is actually on the Economist. So someone posted a link to goo.gl which redirects to getpocket.com which finally redirects to economist.com.

Wasn't Chrome going to put a stop to this asshattery?

Really? Dick move.

Unshorten.it reveals that the actual link is: https://getpocket.com/redirect?

Haha! a spam link to a product completely unrelated to the supposed story.

Nice "work" there msmash...

One seems to be Pocket at https://getpocket.com/

"...the manner in which videos, articles or content has been accessed, saved and shared. We may use aggregated information to offer a list of top sites or content, or to make suggestions to our users or to report on usage and trends. We may also analyze and use aggregated information to improve the products and services that we offer, and to develop new products and services. "

Yep.

https://getpocket.com/privacy

It's written a bit slimy, making strong statements then giving really innocent examples. I'm reading it while trying to keep in mind that a service to store your bookmarks is going to have to have a privacy policy which allows them to store your bookmarks.

Everything free is malware these days, and many things paid.

I don't understand the point of this Pocket stuff (or Wallabag, which someone mentioned as similar). Would someone please explain what use it has?

For Pocket, I read "If it's in Pocket, it's on your phone, tablet or computer. You don't even need an Internet connection."

OK, but how is that different from Ctrl-S (Save page)?

For Wallabag, apparently you still need an Internet connection: "when you open your wallabag, you can comfortably read your articles. [...] you can install it on your web server or you can create a free account at Framabag.

So how is that different from just bookmarking the page?

From reading the Mozilla Governance newsgroup, it looks like they did a survey and found that top demands were for (1) a reading list (like in Safari) and (2) a video downloader. Implementing (1) could have been a straightforward bookmark list shared through Mozilla Sync, which is basically what Reading List is on Safari -- a dedicated bookmark /tmp/ zone for bookmarks you don't plan on keeping around and that you can access through any device in the ecosystem via iCloud sync. They could have just made a bookmark list and used Mozilla Sync to handle it, but that was apparently hard and didn't reach devices like e-readers where Mozilla doesn't run. So, they had Pocket do everything for them: a bookmark list, with sync to many devices for which Mozilla has no client, and data mining of your uploaded bookmarks and your e-mail address and the address of any friends with whom you share stuff and your visits to various beaconed web-sites across the net.

If Mozilla actually cared about their users, they'd roll in a full adblock, noscript, and plugin blocker solution (not just the Polaris tracking protection that's in the Nightly Builds). After all, those are the most downloaded plugins. Then they'd build in a "download video" function. And in doing so they'd seal their fate as they'd have pissed off all the advertisers and all the IP lawyers. So, instead it's easier (and legally much less troublesome) to sell the users to Pocket as a way of implementing a Reading List.

From reading the Mozilla Governance newsgroup, it looks like they did a survey and found that top demands were for (1) a reading list (like in Safari) and (2) a video downloader. Implementing (1) could have been a straightforward bookmark list shared through Mozilla Sync, which is basically what Reading List is on Safari -- a dedicated bookmark /tmp/ zone for bookmarks you don't plan on keeping around and that you can access through any device in the ecosystem via iCloud sync. They could have just made a bookmark list and used Mozilla Sync to handle it, but that was apparently hard and didn't reach devices like e-readers where Mozilla doesn't run. So, they had Pocket do everything for them: a bookmark list, with sync to many devices for which Mozilla has no client, and data mining of your uploaded bookmarks and your e-mail address and the address of any friends with whom you share stuff and your visits to various beaconed web-sites across the net.

If Mozilla actually cared about their users, they'd roll in a full adblock, noscript, and plugin blocker solution (not just the Polaris tracking protection that's in the Nightly Builds). After all, those are the most downloaded plugins. Then they'd build in a "download video" function. And in doing so they'd seal their fate as they'd have pissed off all the advertisers and all the IP lawyers. So, instead it's easier (and legally much less troublesome) to sell the users to Pocket as a way of implementing a Reading List.

Quoth Mozilla from TFA:

Pocket has been a popular Firefox add-on for a long time and we’ve seen that users love to save interesting Web content to easily revisit it later, so it was an easy choice to offer Pocket as a service in Firefox and we’ve gotten lots of positive feedback about the integration from users.

All the code related to this integration within Firefox is open source and Pocket has licensed all the Firefox integration code under the MPLv2 license. On top of that, Pocket asked Mozilla for input on how to improve their policy, based on early comments from Mozillians. After that discussion, Pocket updated their privacy policy in early May to explain more precisely how they handle data. You can read Pocket’s privacy policy here.

Directly integrating Pocket into the browser was a choice we made to provide this feature to our users in the best way possible. To disable Pocket, you can remove it from your toolbar or menu. If Pocket is removed from the toolbar or menu, then the feature is effectively disabled, though you can still find it again by accessing it in the Customize Panel. You can find detailed instructions here.

The "removal instructions" are just to drag the button out of sight, but the bug report asking for actual removal, quoth Manish Goregaokar [:manishearth]:

Pocket is just a bunch of API calls. Firefox UI code is lazy loaded. Put those two together, and yes, Pocket code is effectively "disabled". It will cause no extra baggage until viewed.

I had a Kindle Fire for a while but found that wifi coverage really wasn't very good even though I live in a major city. No wifi on the train

It won't solve your problem of having to leave devices turned off during takeoff and landing, but one thing you might try is the Pocket app. It lets you save articles to read offline.

They have something that is called "local storage" for something called "apps".

Provided that you're on an Android tablet or that Apple or Microsoft approves the app. Otherwise, you have to run the app on a remote computer and display it through SSH, VNC, or HTTPS.

I mean, what were you going to use a laptop for without wi-fi?

The same thing I usually do on my bus commute to and from work: read web pages saved with Pocket and write code for hobby projects. The first can be done on any major tablet; the second cannot on an iPad or RT tablet. Yes, I understand that the second is out of the ordinary, so let me give an example of something more common: A lot of people write articles, and it's a lot easier to type large amounts of text on a physical keyboard than on a touch screen. Sure, you could carry a Bluetooth keyboard, but by that point, you might as well carry a 10" laptop.

cellular

How many tablet owners actually 1. pay extra for a tablet supporting cellular and 2. pay per month for a cellular data subscription for the tablet?