Yeah everyone needs to stop using Chrome.
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
321 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
59111 readers
5968 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
firefox is pretty good
Firefox is the only real alternative
You notice how they block certain VPN IP addresses too? I try to use IPVanish but lots of them don’t work specifically just on Google. They claim to care about security then sometimes don’t let you use a VPN? Yeah whatever..
Stop Using Chrome
Literally do not understand why the fuck anyone still uses that browser. If you want Chromium, use Vivaldi, use Brave, SHIT USE EDGE. STILL BETTER THAN CHROME.
Chrome is easily the most invasive browser, one of the worst when it comes to resource management, and one of the most locked down browsers.
Ideally you should just use Firefox.
Posing Brave as an alternative to Chrome is ridiculous. It's a crypto scam company that intends to profit from advertising. And they have been caught inserting referrals into url suggestions.
Don't know why you think Edge is better either. Microsoft is no more your friend than Google and they have every intention to collect as much data as possible.
If you want chromium, use a build of un-googled chromium. You don't need to replace one evil with another if you can just rip it out altogether.
You know Firefox has literally the exact same feature Google is being sued over, right? A lawsuit doesn't automatically have merit just because you don't like the party being sued.
Are you talking about private viewing mode? Firefox has it, but it may not be implemented the same and it may not have the same level of tracking.
Sounds like you may know though. What's the issue with Firefox's implementation?
I know exactly what Chrome does and I assume Firefox does the same because I don't know what else it would do. It basically acts as if you created a temporary profile that's deleted when you close the window. There's a little more to it than that, like being able to opt in to using extensions from your main profile, but basically it's just for things like preventing your family from seeing that you've been watching porn or shopping for Christmas presents.
People seem to get confused a lot because it doesn't use encryption, hide your IP address, or anything like that, and you can still be tracked if you sign into things in the private/incognito window.
The problem isn't the feature, it's the fact they still do things they said they are not doing while in incognito. I don't think I should get ads from stuff I look up while incognito.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
On Monday, a California judge denied Google’s request for summary judgment in a lawsuit filed by users alleging the company illegally invaded the privacy of millions of people.
The people suing Google say that occurred because Google’s cookies, analytics, and tools in apps continued to track internet browsing activity even after users activated Incognito mode Chrome, or other similar features like Safari’s private browsing expecting a certain level of privacy.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers pointed to statements in the Chrome privacy notice, Privacy Policy, Incognito Splash Screen, and Search & Browse Privately Help page about how incognito mode limits the information stored or how people can control the information they share, writing, “Taken as a whole, a triable issue exists as to whether these writings created an enforceable promise that Google would not collect users’ data while they browsed privately.”
Finally, given the nature of Google’s data collection, the Court is satisfied that money damages alone are not an adequate remedy.
Injunctive relief is necessary to address Google’s ongoing collection of users’ private browsing data.”
The lawsuit was filed in 2020, seeking “at least” $5 billion in damages, and as reported by Mike Swift for MLex, the ruling was not entirely surprising, as the judge had indicated she’d do so, but it is a big one as it moves the case closer toward settlement or a trial.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
When are these multibillion dollar companies actually going to be sued for more than what is essentially a nickel to them?
It's like a game for lawyers, they know google is hemmoraging money so they decide "ohhhh let's sue them, but just for a lil bit, don't want to piss them off TOO much"
Remember "Don't be evil?" Pepperidge farm remembers
Now if we could just have personal data collecting/harvesting banned! (I know, in a perfect world)
Gotta go back to the 1980s for that.
Just lie online. Like, all the time. Doesn't stop it but it fucks with it.