This one took me a second. You’re not the one fingerprinting, other people are. It’s worse for the fingerprinters, better for you. “Worse for fingerprinting” means it’s more difficult to use as a fingerprint
Some harm, but (somewhat) minor. Installing addons for Firefox makes you more susceptible to browser fingerprinting due to fewer people having the same setup. It’s harder to fingerprint your browser if you’re just running defaults
More generic and therefore worse for fingerprinting. Though that’s only because it’s built in and standardized.
If it’s shipping by default, it’s better for preventing fingerprinting. If it’s default on the browser, that’s one less indentifying detail
This one took me a second. You’re not the one fingerprinting, other people are. It’s worse for the fingerprinters, better for you. “Worse for fingerprinting” means it’s more difficult to use as a fingerprint
what does that even mean? what aspect is more generic that could be used for fingerprinting?
Every Firefox will have this. Every Firefox doesn’t have uBlock
A better way to phrase it is “Not every Firefox install has uBlock”.
The way you worded it suggests to native English speakers that Firefox and uBlock are mutually exclusive, which isn’t the caze
Is there any value in redundancy?
no, but no harm either. they use the same lists so one of them will just be doing nothing whenever the other removes something.
Some harm, but (somewhat) minor. Installing addons for Firefox makes you more susceptible to browser fingerprinting due to fewer people having the same setup. It’s harder to fingerprint your browser if you’re just running defaults