The way that multiple (I counted 4) articles of theirs talked about it as though it was a report I was expecting a deeper analysis but they just presented keywords pulled from privacy policies and extrapolated.
The tone used was also oddly casual and blog-like for an important topic ('ugh', 'yikes', 'wtf', liberal use of exclamations—even double exclamations), apart from hypothetical scenarios which don't help ground their points. In the AMA they admit they're unaware what various aspects mean yet the articles present findings emphatically.
Mozilla recently published[1] a page about how they had four lawyers and three 'privacy experts' analyze a Microsoft service agreement and yet the page contains zero comments or analysis from them, merely containing two paragraphs that the conclusion was indecisive.
I do appreciate Mozilla bringing attention to such topics, though for all the money and effort they put in getting people to analyze things I kinda hoped their articles would be more substantive than what a reader can similarly determine.
The tone used was also oddly casual and blog-like for an important topic ('ugh', 'yikes', 'wtf', liberal use of exclamations—even double exclamations), apart from hypothetical scenarios which don't help ground their points. In the AMA they admit they're unaware what various aspects mean yet the articles present findings emphatically.
Mozilla recently published[1] a page about how they had four lawyers and three 'privacy experts' analyze a Microsoft service agreement and yet the page contains zero comments or analysis from them, merely containing two paragraphs that the conclusion was indecisive.
I do appreciate Mozilla bringing attention to such topics, though for all the money and effort they put in getting people to analyze things I kinda hoped their articles would be more substantive than what a reader can similarly determine.
[1] https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/campaigns/microsoft-ai/