7 ms·

Let me guess, everything about "Privacy Sandbox" is meaningless when the company that proposes it also holds a major stronghold on the web thanks to Google Anal

Let me guess, everything about "Privacy Sandbox" is meaningless when the company that proposes it also holds a major stronghold on the web thanks to Google Analytics, Google SSO, etc. Google themselves will likely barely be impacted (and why should we expect otherwise, google is not going to shoot themselves in the foot) Makes me think of this quote from the webkit policy https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention-policy/ https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention-policy/ : > When faced with a tradeoff, we will typically prioritize user benefits over preserving current website practices. We believe that that is the role of a web browser, also known as the user agent. Google clearly does not believe that.

dastx 7y ago
Google doesn't use webkit any more if that's what you're referring to. But absolutely Google doesn't believe that. Even if the Chromium team truly believed in privacy (and their track record suggests otherwise), there still is a huge conflict of interest and daddy Google is not gonna let them interfere with their revenue.
- nerdjon 7y ago
  That I know, but it is important the differences of a company funded by ads and the ones that are not. Especially given this right at the top: > Recently, some other browsers have attempted to address this problem, but without an agreed upon set of standards, attempts to improve user privacy are having unintended consequences.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 7y ago
    > some other browsers have attempted to address this problem, but without an agreed upon set of standards That's rich coming from the makers of Chrome...
ehsankia 7y ago
Except without advertising half of the internet collapses. And to anyone suggesting that a paid model will just surface, I don't really want to live in a world where only the rich have access to tools as useful as Maps, Translate or Youtube.
- FlowNote 7y ago
  Only the bad half collapses.
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  Half of the Internet collapsing due to lack of ad revenue isn’t necessarily an apocalypse, even though it sounds like one. For example, it’d end domain squatting. (EDIT: Guess not!)
  - quotemstr 7y ago
    No it won't. Domain squatting is so cheap that it's worth it even without ads.
- saiya-jin 7y ago
  so it will collapse, and new stuff will emerge to fill the void... so?
  - ehsankia 7y ago
    And how do you suggest a service such as Maps or Youtube stay free? Do you realize the amount of money that goes into maintaining those services? Would you be okay to returning to using paper maps? Or do you propose the rich get richer by having better tools and the poor are stuck with primitive tools?
    - falcolas 7y ago
      How has openstreetmap.org remained free, if it's impossible to do without ads? Or torrents? Or GitHub? Or webarchive? Or any of the millions of other dual-licensed services or volunteer run services? It will still get done, even without ads. The internet has, oddly enough, been the one to prove that to be the rule, not the exception.
    - packet_nerd 7y ago
      I haven't tried it yet, but Peertube looks like an interesting alternative to Youtube. Mastadon and Matrix are similar exciting projects too. I host a Matrix instance that I and my extended family use to keep in touch, and we can seamlessly interoperate with anyone on any other Matrix instance. A few kinks to work out still (I wish the server software was way less bloated) but overall I think it's a really promising approach. My instance is completely ad-free, I might add.
Despegar 7y ago
If the EC or DoJ forced a spin-off of Chrome from Google it would fix that incentive right away. Chrome would be in a position to extract a large TAC payment to be the default search engine (like Apple) and they could realistically focus on being the best browser for privacy.

dastx 7y ago

Google doesn't use webkit any more if that's what you're referring to. But absolutely Google doesn't believe that. Even if the Chromium team truly believed in privacy (and their track record suggests otherwise), there still is a huge conflict of interest and daddy Google is not gonna let them interfere with their revenue.

nerdjon 7y ago
That I know, but it is important the differences of a company funded by ads and the ones that are not. Especially given this right at the top: > Recently, some other browsers have attempted to address this problem, but without an agreed upon set of standards, attempts to improve user privacy are having unintended consequences.
- yjftsjthsd-h 7y ago
  > some other browsers have attempted to address this problem, but without an agreed upon set of standards That's rich coming from the makers of Chrome...

ehsankia 7y ago

Except without advertising half of the internet collapses. And to anyone suggesting that a paid model will just surface, I don't really want to live in a world where only the rich have access to tools as useful as Maps, Translate or Youtube.

FlowNote 7y ago
Only the bad half collapses.
floatingatoll 7y ago
Half of the Internet collapsing due to lack of ad revenue isn’t necessarily an apocalypse, even though it sounds like one. For example, it’d end domain squatting. (EDIT: Guess not!)
- quotemstr 7y ago
  No it won't. Domain squatting is so cheap that it's worth it even without ads.
saiya-jin 7y ago
so it will collapse, and new stuff will emerge to fill the void... so?
- ehsankia 7y ago
  And how do you suggest a service such as Maps or Youtube stay free? Do you realize the amount of money that goes into maintaining those services? Would you be okay to returning to using paper maps? Or do you propose the rich get richer by having better tools and the poor are stuck with primitive tools?
  - falcolas 7y ago
    How has openstreetmap.org remained free, if it's impossible to do without ads? Or torrents? Or GitHub? Or webarchive? Or any of the millions of other dual-licensed services or volunteer run services? It will still get done, even without ads. The internet has, oddly enough, been the one to prove that to be the rule, not the exception.
  - packet_nerd 7y ago
    I haven't tried it yet, but Peertube looks like an interesting alternative to Youtube. Mastadon and Matrix are similar exciting projects too. I host a Matrix instance that I and my extended family use to keep in touch, and we can seamlessly interoperate with anyone on any other Matrix instance. A few kinks to work out still (I wish the server software was way less bloated) but overall I think it's a really promising approach. My instance is completely ad-free, I might add.

Despegar 7y ago

If the EC or DoJ forced a spin-off of Chrome from Google it would fix that incentive right away. Chrome would be in a position to extract a large TAC payment to be the default search engine (like Apple) and they could realistically focus on being the best browser for privacy.