It sounds like the author doesn't quite know how cookies work. It's great that Firefox does cookie blocking by default, but it's not like not doing that is chro

It sounds like the author doesn't quite know how cookies work. It's great that Firefox does cookie blocking by default, but it's not like not doing that is chrome-only -- and it's not chrome that's setting all these cookies, it's the internet advertising business. It'd be more honest to write an article about Firefox breaking bad internet standards in the interest of the user, and another one about internet tracking being out of control. Chrome has issues, and it'd be good if it blocked more cookies by default, but the headline here is way overblown. The headline might even be apt with a different article! But it seems we all want to be believe the headline so much that we didn't read past it. Edit: the article this was duped into has a much better headline.