Indicators Internet Health Report
Categories: Internet Health

How would you measure the health of the Internet?

If you want to know if the Internet is healthy, what do you track? The number of people online? The speed of your connection?

Mozilla’s Internet Health Report is an open source initiative to document and explain what’s happening with the Internet combining research from multiple sources.

A prototype of the report was released in January (version 0.1) that included 20 data visualizations of internet health metrics across five issues: decentralization, openness, privacy and security, web literacy and digital inclusion. Since then we have received lots of insightful feedback.

Now, in preparation for the next publication, we’re asking you: what are the most important things to track?

With something as large and complex as the Internet, we can only benefit from working together to figure out what is measurable, globally relevant and most significant to Internet health.

Your ideas, votes and feedback will be reviewed by our research advisors, who will help chose the 10-20 indicators to include in the Internet Health Report in 2018 and beyond.

To have your say, visit by June 9 June 16, 2017.

For more information about this process check our FAQs.

The indicators that are selected through this process will serve as the foundation for the 2018 Internet Health Report, but the final publication will also include additional research and content.

Thanks in advance for participating!

89 comments on “How would you measure the health of the Internet?”

Post a comment

  1. Tim Garriques wrote on

    From those according to their ability, to those according to their need… Marx. As Margaret Thatcher said, ‘Socialism works until they run out of other people’s money.’ Therein is always the rub when some advocate for the robbing of others. And robbing of others is what ‘net neutrality’ is all about. While the developers of the Net invested great wealth and talent to create technology and infrastructure that is called the Net, there are today those who wold deny those developers the right to enjoy the fruit of their own labors, the profit they have worked so hard to earn. Those developers created the environment that allows open technical digital architecture creation that some choose to pursue. Capitalism provides room for non-profits to exist and even prosper. It should be understood that CEO’s of non-profits enjoy healthy incomes as do those of for-profit corporations. In a truly free and open environment, those with greater need should have a right to satisfy that need by paying more to purchase resource, bandwidth, than others are willing to pay. Hence, we have a truly free-market where the buyer or consumer chooses the level of service he or she is willing to pay for. The profit from such enterprise allows room for further development/expansion in whatever direction best serves the needs to the consumer. It must always be remembered that socialized control economies always result in resource or commodity shortage as there will always be far more need/consumption than ability to produce, especially when there is no gatekeeper on the cost of that use.


    1. mrblobby wrote on

      Nonsense! Your beliefs are what it should be and not…… “what it is”?


    2. Ernest Collins wrote on

      “From those according to their ability to those according to their need… Marx” this is widely misinterpreted. It works both ways. To those according to their need means those who have needs to be particularly inventive or goal oriented, as well. What isn’t said is that there is a presumption that given the opportunity common people will do will not produce! History has made it clear that vast civilizations crop up wherever the resources are available to let this happen. It would surely appear that those who have a particular ambition are more entitled than those who are interested in doing something else. – depending on whatever values are popular or evident at the time. This is largely based on self-interest and NOT the wishes of others. Human beings are looking for self-expression and the kind of life they want. NOT the kind of life the ambitious would force them into. Most of recorded history is about what happens when people are dominated, not what happens when they chose.

      Robbing others is often a euphonism for a difference of opinion as to how much value a particular person s contribution is worth. How much is a dollar’s worth of labor? – to the majority of the population? No one has an answer to this. Democracy was invented to help solve this problem but it has largely been undermined around the world. THe main point is , those who have, want to keep, and those who don’t will press for more, especially if they are hungry. To say that the value of a persons labor is determined by how desperate they are is diabolical. Finding you drowning in a lake should I make you pay to pull you out? Apparently so.

      “For Profits” are institutions that are determined to get more for their product than it is worth. The loob sidedness in this deal is called profit. They are usually working with a source of the earth that is not clearly owned but is controlled by force of arms. Third world countries around the globe have once been colonized by people who had a circumstantial edge. THey alwas cover this fact with racisium. And they mostly leave these contries in shambles, having milked them of their wealth so that they can take it home and brag about the false ideals we see prostilized here.

      Firtst of all, Capitalism does not really exsist. tHe greedy wealthy would never allow a game plan in which they could lose. It is an organized set of rationalizations put together to justify the immoral greed of the wealthy. Sooner or later the losers in this game notice and asy “What the hell is going on here”.


      1. david siffrin wrote on

        For profits are institutions that charge more than what it costs to produce that item. Anything less would result in financial failure. This is self evident and should not have to be pointed out. Trying to skew this by implying greed is the sole motivating factor is a disservice to anyone who reads your comment.


      2. Josh wrote on

        Tell that to Marx. 😉


    3. K wrote on

      Your comment makes a few assumptions that need to be pointed out. For one thing, net neutrality is simply about treating all data as equal. It’s not about denying creators a right to their intellectual property, it’s insuring that governments and ISPs can’t use their control of resources to filter out things they don’t like.

      Secondly, we don’t have a truly free market. Someone wishing to purchase internet service doesn’t have a choice between all the ISPs that exist. They have a choice between tech giants that provide service to their area. In many cases, this can be as little as one or two options.

      To your later point, ‘socialized control economies always result in resource or commodity shortage,’ that’s really a baseless claim. Take for example the US economy during WW2, which was basically a planned economy and perhaps the time of greatest economic property for a single nation in modern times. Contrast this with post-Regan era deregulation, which ultimately leads to the savings and loan crisis.

      You say that there will always be far more need/consumption than ability to produce, but that’s flatly untrue. On the contrary, it’s a requirement of capitalism that it artificially create consumers because of how greatly production outpaces need (Marx’s idea of commodity fetishism).


      1. PT wrote on



    4. Princess wrote on

      Tim G, I agree! Could not have said it better my self. As for K’s assumption that Reagan-era deregulation created the S &L crisis is at best a wild guest clothed with tethered costume. S & L failed due to many politicians of that time decided that them, their family members, friends and partners were going to get rich at the expanse of tax payers just as what we saw in the 10 plus years past. Frankly I don’t care what Marx said since he did not produce anything, invent anything, labored for anything other than empty bs. I have worked hard, produced things of value and I should be able to enjoy the fruits of my sweat and labor as should my heirs not the lazy mediocre murmuring entitlement give-me crowd of which we seem to have in a huge supply these days. Good thing I got to do that while the going was good but am concerned of the mind-set we have in the media, the politicians, the supreme court judges in America, the free-loader crowd–I’m not speaking of just the 47 percent on govt aid.


      1. Charles wrote on

        Interesting that you argue both sides of the argument: “I have worked hard, produced things of value and I should be able to enjoy the fruits of my sweat and labor as should my heirs not the lazy mediocre murmuring entitlement give-me crowd” yet at the same time you say “S&L failed due to many politicians of that time decided that them, their family members, friends and partners were going to get rich at the expense of tax payers”. So if you get rich, it’s great, if someone else gets rich it’s not. That is the weakness of most arguments presented by the “I stole it first” crowd.


        1. david siffrin wrote on

          I worked hourly jobs for 51 years until retirement. I prospered through my own efforts and “stole” nothing from anyone who was not willing to do the same. Trying to compare crooked politicians who actually did steal to those of us who earned our way is insulting and petty to the extreme.


  2. Lucas wrote on

    Everything I have read, Firefox is one of the best browsers. However, I have had a problem with Firefox hanging or not responding the PC has sat idle. The spinning wheel takes approx. 4 min to after the machine is ready to function. I have seen on the site what could be the problem. Some of the answers are a little too technical for a senior citizen with fear of erasing an needed function. I queried this before and that problem appeared to have been fixed. But, it has returned. Is there a simple method for a layperson to fix this? I have tried chat rooms with questions to no avail. And I realize spam is hard to control. However, I have been receiving spam with new endings such as an envelope icon____”@x.
    And other new ones never seen before such as . “____” way too many to share. If there was a way to control that other than blocking, and listing as spam it would be great.


    1. Josh wrote on

      Bit off topic.

      I gather that resembles a problem with an overloaded site/pages or (and) some plug-in “laziness”.
      For a tech forum it is though. With additional specs and such.
      For now, 1) clean the system from junk and reboot, 2) make sure your installation wasn’t bloated, 3) update your plugins and extentions and make sure there’s nothing of those bloating your browser, 4) check if certain sites/pages overload your CPU. Firefox is a single-process browser, so bare it in mind, open your system Task Manager in advance to see if something’s eating up on you there.


  3. kbutler wrote on

    High speed internet isn’t.
    Reasonable prices are not.
    Reliability of SECURE communication is a joke!
    Spam and other junk email and adverts are exceeded only by President TrAmp’s tweets.
    Government involvement is only to increase costs and revenues, not lower prices and improve service.
    If I could use soup cans and string I think I would.

    Other than that, I’d rate the state of the internet about 2 out of 30.
    Firefox, however, seems to be staying true to its originat purpose and intent.


    1. Charles wrote on

      I have to agree. That is the value of a distributed infrastructure. The less we depend on the concept of “ownership” and control (government or individual), the more likely the Internet will be around in 10 years.


    2. Ernest Collins wrote on

      “Government involvement is only to increase costs and revenues, not lower prices and improve service.
      If I could use soup cans and string I think I would.” Classic – Also: “The less we depend on the concept of “ownership” and control (government or individual), the more likely the Internet will be around in 10 years.”

      True enough but how is this achieved? A monopoly is a monopoly no matter if it is government or private sector. The first suggestion will be to use the government to regulate the market to block the formation of monopolies. That just makes for a more complicated monopoly. The only realistic solution is for us to attain a higher level of civilization that will allow for cooperative participation and still preserve adequate elbow room for competition. So far, raw Capitalism has proven itself not to work. Raw Capitalism is just a pyramid scheme.

      The only real choice is between an economy for the individual or an economy for the progress of humanity. We can choose to move forward but that sociopathic egomaniac is going to take down our world for the illusion of his personal gain. In very short time we get the world we have – a tortured slave population with a very few at the top and almost nobody left with enough money to buy anything. History keeps informing us by pushing our faces in the historical record of failed empires but the message doesn’t seem to take hold.


  4. Tom M.R. Fischer wrote on

    I highly value the principles “Libertarianism.” Some of these being; personal freedom of thought, free speech as long as it doesn’t cause hurt to someone else, freedom of access to information (like the internet) and freedom from the state against intrusion into my life without my consent.

    Because of the above principles, which I consider part of my ‘core value,’ I strongly believe in a free internet, beyond the control of the state, or any other entity that has more power than the individual. I would hope that your organization, would be a watchdog for us in letting us know when this principle is in jepardy.


    1. Ernest Collins wrote on

      I agree wholeheartedly with this persons statement.


    2. Robert Sadler wrote on

      Think about the “Pocket” feature in Firefox.


    3. MJ wrote on

      And yet, Tom Fischer, some of us struggle with the Internet’s freedom for terrorist organizations and individual terrorists to recruit killers online. Do you think “the state” and/or Internet providers should control, dampen, forbid, allow or encourage this use of the Internet?

      After all, our founding documents say that free speech extends to everyone, but of course the founders had no Internet for “the state” or anyone else to manage. They had only vocal speech, letters, posters, newspapers and political tracts. Still freedom of speech was and is to extend to all, whether they speak to us in person, in print, on the airwaves or through the Internet from another country.


  5. Tommy Whalen wrote on

    Here is a thought: Let’s analyze how much money the “net” makes off of its users. ISPs, hardware access, businesses, education, leisure, advertising, etc, etc, etc… This list will go on quite a while I think. We could also look at the influence it has on the users time. I bet we will find the impact is both quite large financially and also requires quite a large investment of “time” from its users…

    I would be interested in discussing this idea with anyone interested. Please email when you can and I will respond promptly within 3 days.


  6. Your name wrote on


    Measure the health against the interenets orinigal idea. “Effective ways to link computers to facilitate the exchange of information.” Freedom of information.


  7. mrblobby wrote on

    The internet has been taken over by the corporate companies and is full of tricks and lies. A very unhealthy place to be unless you dig beneath the surface. The internet is a cess pit! Prove me wrong?


  8. jussie clay wrote on

    as far as am am concern firefox is one of the best browsers that rocks, so calculating and measure of the health of your browser is sample


  9. Bruce wrote on

    track the packets from eth0 ——>


  10. p ledger wrote on

    Prevent further censorship & Government control, a control free net, is my idea of a healthy net


    1. Alexa wrote on



  11. Robert Sadler wrote on

    And the whole thing fails, because “Please create an account before participating!”.


    1. Princess Gill wrote on

      Excellent point!


  12. Bryan Sperbeck wrote on

    Is this a real question? If we look at the internet as “something” that is used across the globe, then security is #1 against infection. Security for all and not for the few. #1 again is freedom. #1 again is content…. things that are repulsive to all human society like torture and other abuses against humanity…. that is shown for the purpose of commerce and sold for commerce, only serves to degrade the human condition. #1 again. EASY access to educational materials for all. And most importantly “Diversity”. No one culture can dominate the internet.


  13. Bruce wrote on

    I think the health of the internet should be measured in three ways:

    1) Freedom of Use: The less restrictions, censorship, and targeting of individuals by governments or companies the healthier. I don’t believe that the heavily censored and restrictive internet they have in places like China and North Korea could be considered healthy. Nor could the extensive spying revealed to be happening in the west.

    2) Freedom of Access: The more people have access to the internet, the healthy the internet is. Being able to access the internet shouldn’t be limmited by your place of birth or financial situation. The more countries have access, the more access there is in remote places, and the more free public access, like libraries and schools, the healthier. Also the better the access for disabled people, the healthier.

    3) Standards Compliant: The more consistent and uniform the internet is the healthier. This means more work for developers but is the only way to ensure good access for disabled people, and too allow the internet to evolve to it’s next level, where artificial intellegence programs have as much access to websites as human beings. It’ll also keep developers in paid work. 😉


  14. D Minall wrote on

    My personal view is that the health of the internet is a measure of two aspects. Firstly, of how open and unencumbered the physical structure of data transmission remains for individuals, against the degree to which influence from corporate and government agencies impose (for a variety of reasons). The other aspect, of data, rather than the transmission, is to what extent (again) corporate and government agencies use data that passes into their domains against the interests of the originators. The open system, in my mind, is the healthy state. Meaning that the clear detractors to the health of the internet are the interests of money and power – nothing new in that.


  15. Janet Wilham wrote on

    Since they gave all control that the USA had for years away and ICANN is now up for grabs by anyone and everything there will be things going on with our internet unlike nothing we have seen before–even to the point that China will take it over and block all connections coming from the USA—we are in for some horrible things to occur.
    You asked me for my opinion so I won,t hold back….
    And to add the worst thing of all–child porn and children being sold to the highest bidder though the “deep web” and TOR browser and those servers who ALLOW this to go on need to be in prison!!!!!-WE must stop this and protect children!!!
    I use the internet and I use different browsers and with Firefox I keep getting a disconnection error a lot unlike with Opera or IE……so something is wrong with the server.
    Firefox works well with Flash, HTML5 and java….so no problem there unlike Opera which will not work with anything related to Flash.

    so what can I do about the major issues I see and child safety being my TOP concern—all I can do is report what I see and voice–but most of all pray for the protection of children…….! and thats what I think.


  16. Dalibor Sver wrote on

    To improve Internet health there should be a standard which categorizes sites for various age, at least make a distinction for adult sites. It should be mandatory that there is a warning that a site is adult before entering the site. Some might say “children will click it to enter anyway”, but believe me, many children will not and will be spared from the shocks they didn’t want to see.


  17. Ted Tyree wrote on

    I propose that the health of the internet is no longer connectivity and speed – those are a given. (and if your internet isn’t fast enough, switch carriers. you’ll pay less and get better service) And it is not so much about freedom of speech or freedom of cost. Many things on the world wide web are already free in both senses; google search, wikipedia, kahn academy, etc. And it becomes somewhat pointless to measure the ease by which a person can achieve social connections – there’s an over abundance of ways to connect and interact; facebook, online games, snapchat, pinterest – need I continue? And mobility? I can stay connected to all of these resources while travelling 70 mph down a highway in the twisted hills of Pennsylvania (with only an occasional blip in service). What if the new measure of the health of the internet is the ratio of value-added transactions against useless or malicious interactions – the number of quality resources and information found/queried/delivered each minute measured against the amount of spam/viruses/clutter. I realize that this is a subjective measure, but maybe that is OK. So is our measure of the health of our country. Thank you, Mozilla, for taking on this challenge to measure the health of the internet.


  18. Thushanka wrote on

    in simmple terms hierarchy of measurement criteria for determining the health status of internet should comprise as follows;

    1. security and protection (End to end security measures to prevent exploitation of personl data, distortion of public & private data resources, nuisance activities including malwares, bots, cyber stalking, worms, DDOSing, phishing and etc.)

    2. rating mechanism to determine relibility of sources of information (for instance wikipedia being one of the most utilized online encyclopedia contains considerable amount of unreliable/unverified articals and Recent controversy in social media news)

    3. optimized end user control over personal data (Irrespective of intervention of govrnment regulatory bodies and service providers)

    4. Social conformity (capacity to restrict and regulate certain online data in respect to social moral values)

    5. Accessibility /Coverage

    6. Ease of utilization (from technical professionals to domestic user)

    6. Reasonable speed

    7. Reasonable price


  19. Himanshu wrote on

    the internet when dead gives less satisfaction as health of the price which we paid to access the internet becomes out of breathe . Otherwise, the internet will be fast and may show signs of being dead through the speed.


  20. Raven wrote on

    One and only one thing:

    NET neutrality


    1. Doug Parker wrote on

      From the comments to this point there is too much freedom as observed by some and not enough as noted by others. Each person has different reasons for their opinions. For some listing ‘facts’ and ‘political truth’ one can see and articulate an opposite conclusion to the same problem with different facts and observations. So, as it appears to me there can be no general conclusion on what the term ‘net neutrality’ actually means. There is, however no shortage of volunteers to enforce what they consider should be acceptable. That’s where the problem lies – whose money or influence (both) will carry the day on this/these decisions. The way the world is structured at this time that would be George Soros, destroyer of nations, savior of the world. I’m not looking forward to that.


  21. Stephanie Robinson wrote on

    The Internet is still free, open, and I hope and pray it will continue that way. I value Free Speech, Free Thought, our Basic God-Given Rights solidified by our Constitution (law of our land) written to allow this and keep the Government from usurping these rights. I can’t imagine an Orwellian internet – that would be the end of life as we know it, at least here in America. Dictatorship, fascism, would replace our freedoms – that is untenable!


    1. Princess Gill wrote on

      Food for thought: What God gives He has the authority and power to take away, malfunction in our brains. I agree with your comment.


  22. spider wrote on

    the internet is a pathway, a tool that has already been established, grown, and continues to grow until it cannot. better to look at the health of its host (society) and determine what options are available to either resist perpetuation of malignancy or propel towards new hopeful futures (as we were in the 90’s). And, when in doubt, a hard reset can’t hurt.


  23. Frances wrote on

    Before determining the internet’s health, we must determine its purpose.


    1. Alexa wrote on



  24. Bob wrote on

    Web freedom comes with security, security, security
    -I’d like to have a browser that matches Mozilla speed and functionality with Tor security.
    -I’d like to have my search results on a world map / per region so I can have access to the entire web.
    -I’d like to have an algorithm to control my avatar on the web and chose which third party companies can help me to find what I need. I want to create my own cluster on the web for a subject in particular and have as many needed.
    -Private life was once sacred. Now ego maniac are naked on the web… Try to remember how bad Est German Stasi was during the cold war. We recreated it with the web today. Imagine if the Stasi had the web back then…Imagine a dictatorship country with the web today.
    -On a more philosophical thought, If God doesn’t exist, mankind have created big brother. I’m questioning myself on the ability of humanity to be free… or to think without a crutch. Sheep herd need’s shepherd. You will always have free electron black sheep but it’s not the majority. We have to help populations to get back their private life in order to live free; otherwise corporations will crush bugging black sheep very easily and it will append faster than you think.


  25. Jorge Silva wrote on

    Healthy internet would be free for everyone because everyday needs are diferent than 20 years ago. All people need it for information, for funny and for comunication. I think appart of freely internet have to have an entity that “police” the content as I said any kid under 18 years have access to content that they could not have access but some people coud say that filter each parent or public entity could use and have the responsability. The problem is that a lot of parents don’t understand internet and don’t know what their kids are doing on internet. Unfortunaly in my country, Portugal, 90% of parents don’t understand internet and leave their kids in front a computer hours and hours thinking they are doing homeworks.


    1. ditto wrote on

      where do you get the money to better the internet if its free ..


  26. Dave wrote on

    Sensibility and tolerance: add components to the Internet Health algorithm that take into account freedom of expression while also measuring sensibility.

    Tolerance of social media= 1 – (% of public posts deleted by the top 3 social media platforms)

    Sensibility of social media= 1- (% of public posts flagged by the users of the top 3 social media platforms)

    Internet Health (scale 1-10, 10 best) = Internet speed + Internet up-time . . . + freedom of expression + atmosphere of discussion. . .+ . . .

    Mozilla could occasionally sample users from off the Mozilla home page for the data (e.g. “Do you use Facebook, Twitter, or…?” “How many posts have you flagged over the past __ days?”). Of course, this is just an example and it’s more complicated–let me know if you need help.


  27. JOANN BRATCHER wrote on

    The Internet Health is to know what you are doing it is a real learning tool when you learn to use it on your own intelligently I have grown so much with a little knowledge as well life is not about being taught everything you never learn anything you become dependent on everyone else more than you need too. I learned the computer on my own and it has been easier to make a big come back when you have no help you learn how to help yourself your own way and in the end it has save me money and I am a winner most of the time and I don’t have to share mines either my money either everyone else have dibs on them as well. I don’t as well. The punch line they are the one who keep starting it as well with a bitchy ass attitude and lose to it as well. Well what is important don’t take offense as well let the chain of command know do it the right way mines is heaven on earth. Well now what to do next be ready for the next line of fire how just educate yourself and protect yourself and don’t leave yourself wide open and be in the money making because as well. I just keep going and mines keep coming up as well. 57 years and on to 58 years.


  28. Rod Hart wrote on

    There can and will not be any neutrality on the the web as long as hackers can get on so easily, a child can hack into most web sites with little I have a friend of some 10 years old who can write programmes all things being equal when children and hackers can go about so easily and close down systems, just how clever are these so called IT experts. Several months ago I had a self proclaimed PC Doctor who knew far less than me. Everyone has got in on the act, governments, now got a right to look into your affairs and doings on the web. America and Russia, Americans hacked Merkels phone, cnsidering she is an East German Communist I am not surprised she and Corbyn would get on fine. You joined the web so stop whining and live with it.


  29. Lisa W. wrote on

    One shouldn´t have to opt-out for data collection. It should be the other way around, to opt-in. In the event that opting-in can´t ever be a reality, one shouldn´t have to provide a picture i.d. to data collection sites in order to opt-out. How absurd!


  30. Daz Ace wrote on

    A healthy Internet would be cleaner internet, for example:
    100% Healthy Internet Check!

    Contains No terrorist information….
    Contains No child pornography….
    Contains Pure Gaming…..
    Contains Pure Educational tools and literature….

    social media also.. but better tools, controls or laws on the purpose of use i.e. terrorism or child pornography outlawed…


  31. Nick wrote on

    Security of choice
    Total access
    And a 3D(matrix style) browser to take you anywhere you like 🙂


  32. HANK wrote on



  33. Mark Brathwaite wrote on

    A healthy internet promotes freedom of thought & expression (and development of ideas both inside & outside of tech)! A healthier internet has less viruses & malware — M


  34. Jim Fetter wrote on

    I measure the health of the internet by how much security, ad blockers, spyware and other programs I have to have installed on my computer just to surf the net without all the illegal manipulations trying to scam me, …………….. and there are a lot of them out there.
    So from what I see the health is piss poor right now, and getting worse because scamming people seems to be the norm on line, and because it’s so easy to do and little is done to combat it, so it’s not where I would put my money right now.


  35. vineet wrote on

    > Advertisements (they should be not too less not too many)
    >No of people online
    >spams ,bots ,errors (should be minimum)


  36. vineet wrote on

    Healthy internet for me is availability of SOMETHING for every age group , every religion, culture ,race,etc no one should feel isolated and separated. Every one should be a part of it.


  37. Dean JVR wrote on

    I measure the internet by Real truth. Once can only make a informed decision if you have the true facts. If you always receive the truth to any answer how could you ever make a mistake?


    1. Terry Jordan wrote on

      Unfortunately a large number of people today are not interested in the real truth but only their own truth.


  38. Alexa wrote on

    Honestly I’m just kind of pissed the no matter i go i cant get answers to my long math questions….
    When Mozilla makes some sort of homework app/feature then my health will go STRAIGHT up because I mean….
    who needs homework? \_(^_^)_/


  39. Ajay menon wrote on

    Response, Reliability., and Rationale are the key words ,you expect from the internet, and coupled with innovation, it shall remain the most depended media on earth and elsewhere.


  40. Mike Mallozzi wrote on

    In my opinion I think the “health” of the internet should be measured by the following criteria.

    1) Cyber security: How vulnerable are economic systems, infrastructure, and societies in general to attack.
    2) Extent of nefarious activity: To what extent is the internet being used to facilitate human trafficking, child pornography, political oppression, fake news, etc.
    3) Net neutrality: To what extent is internet traffic being controlled by governments or corporations.
    4) Extent of activity for good: Conversely to number 2. To what extent is the internet being used to solve difficult problems, facilitate global goodwill and understanding, facilitate collaboration and legitimate business


  41. David Jones wrote on

    All the “accounts” that ask for far too much info. (Microsoft are the ultimate). Downloads that give you 100% of their idea when you only require 15%. How safe is the info you give? It is as safe as the next Microsoft employee to run into debt. One way I have reduced this is by using “Jarte” instead of “Microsoft Office”.

    Stay safe out there folks and smile more often. OUR WANTS ARE MANY BUT OUR NEEDS ARE FEW.


  42. saurav wrote on

    Internet can be healthy only if its users behave like family under a single digital roof; leave hate and embrace the socialism.


  43. ditto wrote on

    Internets health ? … Explain what you mean by this .. cause if you ask me if the internet is healthy I am thinking about the over all not just fire fox .. I’m thinking internet in general. There should be a front page for the internet so that those who want to find true facts and real information can and those who want their nonsense entertainment can. YouTube should be doing the same. When you get to your searching browser there should be categories that separate the nonsense from the real the opinions without proper long research separated. The internet can be a great tool but I feel for most its just a mess, distraction and almost mentally abusive. People waste hours and hours on the internet when they should be sleeping or paying attention to real world as well. I just do not get what we are talking about exactly here can someone fill me in ? are they asking if we want Mozilla to start doing cardio runs and hitting the gym or ? like what is the over all question. A virus free internet would be healthy. A way to communicate without internet/ cellphones .. like if we evolved as humans instead of trying to merge our evolution with robots .. Merging with robots is so far beyond wrong … we are humans and we are capable of becoming very powerful .. but have lost our ways and became lazy emotional and distracted .. That’s part of my opinion .. my full opinion i feel no one will read if anyone reads this lol cheers one last thing imagine if instead of using a calculator everyday and using auto correct everyday how goo we might naturally get at math or spelling ? .. maybe I’m crazy but from what I learned repetition makes good practice.


  44. jim wrote on

    I have win xp 32 and i read firefox will no longer support xp so now im looking for some other browser that will support xp . can’t afford another computer with my social sec other wise i have no problems till yesterday when i tried to transition to opera im stuck for now thx for the services and dedication to the public


  45. Phyllis wrote on

    Too much filth allowed.It is bad enough to hear it outside but seeing it on the internet many times is not cool.People are using the F word like it is and, if, or the.


  46. Terry Jordan wrote on

    Very Interesting reading. It will require some pondering.
    Note those assuming there is great access to the internet for all now. It isn’t true.
    Australia is a reasonably wealthy country and we still have issues with children not having reasonable
    access to the internet for school work at home.

    Genuine access for all has to be one of the key health indicators. Reasonable speed but high reliability.
    Poor, menality and physically restricted. How well have we setup the internet for the blind?

    Available standards of application builds. Languages availability within apps is a recent upgrade but how many apps really follow this through. I’m not aware of any standards for the blind. They may be out there.
    How well linked our our new talking apps for the blind.

    We really have built our foundations on some dodgy work. Just get it working for the minimal cost.

    What do we really want?
    High reliability, reasonable speed (faster is always nicer), Don’t want our stuff or family and friends stuff stolen
    or ripped off, Our children protected. We want to be heard and to communicate (share). Hopefully we want others to be safe.

    In some ways we are defining metrics upon ourselves as the internet is really just a collection of the best and worst of us.

    I like Daves approach for some of the metrics
    Tolerance of social media= 1 – (% of public posts deleted by the top 3 social media platforms)
    Sensibility of social media= 1- (% of public posts flagged by the users of the top 3 social media platforms)


  47. Zee wrote on

    Liken the internet to the human body. The circulation of blood (information) is of paramount importance. Some vital organs like the brain and lungs (ISP & infrastructure), require greater blood flow but the extremities like finger tips(average user) also need an adequate supply. The immune system must be tuned to fight viruses and diseases (malware) but not attack the body itself (censoring freedom of expression). Its a bad idea when the brain (users collectively) decides to overwork (profiteer) and not feed the body (pay for usage).

    The issue of privacy is about protecting the individul user from other users and super entities like corporations, governments and eventually Artificial Intelligence ( a coming competitor to the free human).

    The issue of child porn, human trafficking and terrorism belong to the human social realm and is not an internet issue. human society is the base, on top of which, was built the virtual reality of the internet.

    A Healthy internet has a superb free flow of information and less disease (malware, spam & virus).


  48. Emily Platz wrote on

    holy crap thats to much reading & no the internet is not healthy at all. you can’t beleive every thing that’s on the internet. and all you do is sit and not excircize. so people who r freqently on the internet are mostly fat or at least should be.


  49. Raven Knight wrote on

    The “Internet” is an age full of information and to neglect any “information” is too neglect our “freedom of rights” and our freedom to express the true quality of expression; if it be to the worse of viewing or if it to the best of viewing we are not the ones to critique judgment upon others for, “what we except today we do not except tomorrow and what we do not except tomorrow we except today”. This means as life changes so do people and the persons creativity they style for others to see. If we limit internet by so called propaganda acts of fueling and enraging the public due to security and fear then we also limit our freedom of expression. If this is too happen then i must say we will never enter into a true age of information if we secure and limit the use.


  50. Chris A wrote on

    If you are talking about the internet that promotes the free exchange of ideas and helps improve our lives it is very healthy. But the internet that looks to steal our wealth and damage our computers just for spite it is devastating. As long as there is little consequence for malware, spyware, and general vandalism I am apprehensive every time I turn it on! The so called antivirus programs tend to slow the machine to the point of “whats worse the cure or the poison?” I don’t know the answer. Wish I did, I’d put some imaginary money in the imaginary bank!


  51. Terry Thomas wrote on

    Right! How come there isn’t a such thing as Firefox email? I also believe that YouTube is long overdue for some competition, I won’t hold my breath as these events never seem to occur????!!!!!


  52. steve wrote on

    By no interference by Governments or any third party, increased security protocols against the corrupt. Society has to measure what is correct or incorrect content.


  53. doug wrote on

    The golden age of the internet is long gone, we are bombarded with popups, adds, spyware, addware, and tracked everywhere. It’s still a great medium for personnel expression, and for bringing individuals from all over the world to congregate.


  54. Karin wrote on

    All of the ideas I have seen are good. However, free, unencumbered internet is something that needs to be addressed as it relates to security of the active computer, person using that computer, and the ability of the user to designate in finality the types of information made available. If I say that I am not interested in an ad concerning something, it means that I have no use for, have already accomplished the idea, or just think it is inappropriate for me, my age group, or beliefs.
    My use of internet should be my choice of ISP, service provider, and accessing those items I am looking for. Not be told that I cannot get a particular item due to some far-out thinking of the provider. When AT&T took over BellSouth I had been with the latter for several years, had a subscription to a particular source for 5 of those years, AT&T in their “infinite” wisdom decided that I should no longer receive the notes from that subscription. For thee months I tried to get a reason but in the long run by the time I changed providers, they were hanging up on me when I called with my grievance as soon as I told them my name. That is NOT internet neutrality.
    Thank you Mozilla/Firefox for your platform.
    I wish that there was some way to totally stop lewd, lascivious, and gruesome items from being sent to me. Average 70-100 per day. Even though I have designated them as unacceptable.
    Keep monopolization out of any equation where internet use is concerned. I have signed and sent my objections to FCC concerning this and I do not believe that there are 100,000+ people who truly believe that a few companies can tell us what we can do, receive, or post. Probably 10 who sent 500 messages at a time.


  55. Jackie Hill wrote on

    I would measure the health of the internet by the mental and physical health of those in society who use it!

    Given the amount of “trending” that takes place by its users. The health of the internet can be said to be a sheeple farm of mind hacking abusers!.

    I would not call that good health, would you?!
    Not that you are asking for a measure per say ~
    But just to give you an insight
    On how to measure the health of the internet!


  56. Vera wrote on

    Those who do not have the internet should have access at least they could learn more than what they’re taught in school. I mean you say to a person every day go look it up if they don’t have access to the internet how can they?


  57. TonyPhillips wrote on

    I find so much intrusion justified on the basis of “internet freedom.” If I want my penis enlarged, I will ask for it. If I want to talk to a nice Asian lady, I will ask for a nice Asian lady. If I am looking for a Russian woman to marry, I will ask for a Russian woman. I think the constant offering of porn is disgusting — if I want it I will ask for it; I don’t need to have it automatically accessible to my children. I object to having to provide my email address in order to tell people to stop sending things to my email address, so that they can make money selling it to someone else. I don’t want to hear from that quack Dr. Oz. I don’t care what happened to the Osteens — I didn’t ask.

    In short, we need a system whereby if I want to know about or receive what you have to tell or sell me, I WILL ASK YOU FOR IT. If I don’t, I need to have a right to NOT see or hear what you are trying to to tell, or sell to, me.

    Until this problem is solved, the internet will and should continue to be an annoyance at best and criminal at worst.


  58. Victoria McClellan wrote on

    The internet is extremely healthy, contagious, and optional! It will never be a perfect place or space. However, as with anything how we engage with the internet is important. Simply to “ride the wave” meaning surfing the net can in an interesting journey given you will meet and learn a wealth of information. Traveling in unhealthy sites will make you down right sick and your computing device sick (crash, viruses etc.). Like a tell everyone… and this is a life lesson one must think about and learn. The forest is so beautiful on the outside, full of beauty and splendor, yet when you venture into it, this is darkness, dead trees, and it can get very scary and less welcoming. Much like the internet, when you use it as a tool, for learning, creating a business, attending college, shopping, and all the beautiful things that the internet as to offer, it is extremely healthy. However, when visitors use the interest looking for the scrap that does not foster what the internet was intended for, such as lying, stealing (hacking), it is going to get very scary and less welcoming.

    Advise, approach the internet to get the best it has to offer, stay outside the forest and look at how wonderful the internet is and don’t go into the forest given that is where you will find the ugliness of the forest. Nothing ever came from venturing in places that will fill the heart with a dark spot.

    Surf Wisely!


  59. Mohamed Yusoff Ahmad Sulaiman wrote on

    There is nothing wrong with the Internet to date and it should only strive to be better in all of its services and, to be accessible even to the most remote human communities on earth. I would like to see the deeply forested and unsophisticated natives of Papua New Guinea or Brazil Amazon interact/communicate with ultra modern urban living netizens of Europe or Japan with ease and benefiting both sides. Where the internet becomes unhealthy is only when domineering governments intercede with hidden agendas, individuals exploit it with ulterior motives, corporate invest ideas or programs only to profit unfairly from sincere users and the presence of typical cyber terrorist from all nations and religious factions. I rest my case …………..


  60. Allen N Wollscheidt wrote on

    I consider the Social Media (Facebook, Twitter, et al) as the Leprosy of the Internet — Simply because of the way that people use them — From our Moron Trump to ISIS. .

    I have no solution to offer apart from abolishment.

    Incidentally, I concur with TonyPhillips, just above : If I want it, I will ASK for it ! !.


  61. Adashu wrote on

    it is working for now and hope to keep it on.


  62. Fabio wrote on

    to protect the well being of people in the world against the menace of religious based terrorism , like Isis and other groups, the internet should not publish there re vindications of terrorist acts. Also there postings , propaganda , use in social media should be deleted and not published. Finally the terrorist web pages and programs should be hacked and destroyed.


  63. Sandor Görgenyi wrote on

    I am pleased with Firefox, I only have one problem. I’m updating Firefox, but I’m not knowledgeable. Today, I am 73 years old, and unfortunately not an expert on all these technical things that will be done on my Mac Book Pro.
    Sandor Görgenyi


  64. Eric wrote on

    by the measure of good content on the web. social good should exceed the bad it should be a place where children should access without parents worrying about what children will learn from it. it should be filled with more good than evil


  65. Mansur Reza wrote on

    To know the health of my Internet , I would track the speed of my connection.


  66. Sulaiman T. Kanawa wrote on

    It is up to standard…


  67. Xavier wrote on

    The internet needs to be more interactive, intuitive, and smarter. We also need a way to make our time online especially with small electronic devices less addicting, but still practical for usage.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *