2 ms·
The phrasing in his comment was vague. The first part "Why do you think Google Search still knows" can be read like a rhetorical question, especially when combi
by bogwog 7y ago
The phrasing in his comment was vague. The first part "Why do you think Google Search still knows" can be read like a rhetorical question, especially when combined with the outrageousness of the alternative (that Google isn't tracking you)
And if he really is saying that Google doesn't track you in incognito mode, then I'm going to go ahead and assume he's either lying, or he's not in a position to know about that system. This is Google we're talking about here.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/22/google-track-android-users-location-services-turned-off-sim https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/22/google-tr...
- lucb1e 7y agoYou're morphing their plain English into a different meaning and seem completely convinced that you're right. I'm not sure there is a point talking if you are already convinced to an extreme extent. For the record, I'm not saying that I expect Google not to track me when they detect some privacy mode. It'll sure try to set cookies, and it may use my IP address and connect whatever that IP accesses as a weak indicator of interest for anyone else with that IP address (for a limited amount of time, since IPs change in many countries). What I don't think is that, when they say they don't do fingerprinting, they're lying. This person may not be privileged to know and say "I don't know", but that's different from saying "Google doesn't". Also for the record, I didn't downvote you (and when you reply to me, I can't; I don't have an alt account with 1k rep or whatever it is one needs to downvote).