Google was already in the middle of a class-action lawsuit regarding the incognito mode, where they were accused of tracking user activity. And, they agreed to settle the lawsuit.
To conclude that and move on, they will have to make the necessary changes to prevent another lawsuit against them.
It’s never been a secret what incognito mode does. Websites have always still been able to do whatever they want with your traffic, because the browser doesn’t control that in any way.
Honestly, this article is pretty bad at explaining the problem here. It’s clear that other websites will try to track you, but the important part of this incognito drama is this:
The plaintiffs also accused Google of taking Chrome users’ private browsing activity and then associating it with their already-existing user profiles.
it’s obviously not obvious to some people who think it gives them some semblance of privacy.people who think it gives them some semblance of privacy.
As I said in a different comment, it should have been obvious to anyone with with basic reading skills. Google may be a shitty company (it surely is), but the PEBCAK factor is strong factor in this case.
The only “private mode” of browsing is anything that’s not Chrome or Edge.
Disagree. Independently on the browser you use, website may track you server side and you wouldn’t ever know.
That’s not true. If you’re intentionally logged in to a website, sure, but tracking without an account requires action on the part of your browser, assuming you’re using a VPN. Cookies, ad-IDs, user agent, preferred language, etc. is all information that the browser can decide if it provides or not.
I promise none of these people are using a VPN. IP is plenty.
Chrome never claimed it was spoofing any of those details, and spoofing those details without clearly telling the users what they’re doing and why would murder the user experience. Their position as a browser had literally no impact on that tracking.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
No shit.
It’s never been a secret what incognito mode does. Websites have always still been able to do whatever they want with your traffic, because the browser doesn’t control that in any way.
Honestly, this article is pretty bad at explaining the problem here. It’s clear that other websites will try to track you, but the important part of this incognito drama is this:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/google-agrees-to-settle-in-chrome-incognito-mode-class-action-lawsuit/
Of course they did. It doesn’t take any kind of abuse of the browser to do that. It’s all on the website side and everyone does that.
Ban most data gathering websites do. But this has literally zero to do with the browser.
Yeah. But you don’t get upvotes so easily by not shouting “Google bad!”.
While this might be obvious to you or I, it’s obviously not obvious to some people who think it gives them some semblance of privacy.
The only “private mode” of browsing is anything that’s not Chrome or Edge.
Firefox’s private mode says:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/common-myths-about-private-browsing
I’m not reading that. I know what I’m talking about.
Ok. I’ll leave it just in case someone else doesn’t.
How much obvious does it need to be?
They lost a $5B lawsuit because the things on that page weren’t true.
As I said in a different comment, it should have been obvious to anyone with with basic reading skills. Google may be a shitty company (it surely is), but the PEBCAK factor is strong factor in this case.
Disagree. Independently on the browser you use, website may track you server side and you wouldn’t ever know.
Just because you have the skill to read doesn’t mean you read ever piece of text in the known universe.
Right. Much easier to avoid reading altogether and just blame someone else when bad thing occur. Typical.
That’s not true. If you’re intentionally logged in to a website, sure, but tracking without an account requires action on the part of your browser, assuming you’re using a VPN. Cookies, ad-IDs, user agent, preferred language, etc. is all information that the browser can decide if it provides or not.
I promise none of these people are using a VPN. IP is plenty.
Chrome never claimed it was spoofing any of those details, and spoofing those details without clearly telling the users what they’re doing and why would murder the user experience. Their position as a browser had literally no impact on that tracking.