3 ms·
For what it's worth, in case you did a double take as I did, it's "(removing a feature) to protect consumers' privacy" (that is, a good move), not "removing (a
by JadeNB 10y ago
For what it's worth, in case you did a double take as I did, it's "(removing a feature) to protect consumers' privacy" (that is, a good move), not "removing (a feature to protect consumers' privacy)" (a bad move).
I'm not sure why we're keeping the clickbait title; the feature is the battery status API, which a study (http://lukaszolejnik.com/battery http://lukaszolejnik.com/battery) showed might open up privacy issues. EDIT: Neither complaint applies to the new title. Thanks to the editors for changing it!
- dictum 10y agoI joke about their headline clichés, but the NYT solved this a while ago. Their standard headline format is [motivation, action]. So it would probably be "To protect consumers' privacy, web companies remove a feature" (Actually it would probably be "In web browsers, a feature finds an unexpected use" or some such)