4 ms·

Chrome doesn't need fingerprinting at all. If you are using that browser, you are already being tracked at all times. So by implementing fingerprinting resistan

by lopis 7y ago

Chrome doesn't need fingerprinting at all. If you are using that browser, you are already being tracked at all times. So by implementing fingerprinting resistance in the most popular browser, Google can thus hurt the competition while merrily continue their tracking business as usual.

Consultant32452 7y ago
Yep, on the occasion I need to use chrome it's very upset by the fact I'm not logged into my Google account. I'm sure most users log in. So Google really, really knows who you are.
- blackearl 7y ago
  The profile will connect to Chrome if you use any Google products with a login. changing this is opt-out
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    Is it possible to get Chrome to never nag me to create and log into a profile? When I open Chrome right now it asks me to authenticate or "Browse as Guest." Honestly it's kind of a rhetorical question because by having the nag screen the damage is already done to Google's reputation and it makes me feel really icky. Opting out of the nag screen just hides the grossness, and I would rather be reminded that using Chrome, and by extension all Google products, is just a bad idea.
jefftk 7y ago
If you read the links I posted above, Chrome's plan is not "implement fingerprinting resistance while leaving third party cookies alone". It's "implement fingerprinting resistance, add new APIs that give privacy preserving ways of doing some of the things third party cookies are used for today, and remove third party cookies".
- blackearl 7y ago
  The problem is Google tracking, not just third parties.
  - jefftk 7y ago
    Google ads don't have any special access in Chrome. They use regular cookies.
    - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
      Why would Google even need to use cookies inside of its own browser which is linked to your personal identity? It's like saying Facebook uses regular cookies on its own website to figure out which pages you visit. I guess they could, but they already have your page view history so it's kind of pointless. If anything it sounds like a red herring argument.
      - jefftk 7y ago
        Facebook does use cookies to handle identity on their website; that's how they know you're you. Google's ad networks do use cookies for ad targeting, even in Chrome.
        OnlineGladiator 7y ago
        I'm not saying they don't. I'm saying they have a litany of other tools (I've spoken at length with engineers at Facebook about how they do this) that really make those unnecessary. Obviously you know more about how Google does it, and admittedly ads is not my wheelhouse at all. But from what I understand: it's overkill. If you can point me towards a source that discusses the technical details of how Google tracks its users, I'd be interested in reading it.
        jefftk 7y ago
        > I'm saying they have a litany of other tools (I've spoken at length with engineers at Facebook about how they do this) that really make those unnecessary. That's not how identity works on the web. Cookies are how every site tracks logged-in identity, including Facebook. To test this, clear your facebook.com cookies and observe that you're logged out.

by lopis 7y ago

Consultant32452 7y ago

Yep, on the occasion I need to use chrome it's very upset by the fact I'm not logged into my Google account. I'm sure most users log in. So Google really, really knows who you are.

blackearl 7y ago
The profile will connect to Chrome if you use any Google products with a login. changing this is opt-out
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  Is it possible to get Chrome to never nag me to create and log into a profile? When I open Chrome right now it asks me to authenticate or "Browse as Guest." Honestly it's kind of a rhetorical question because by having the nag screen the damage is already done to Google's reputation and it makes me feel really icky. Opting out of the nag screen just hides the grossness, and I would rather be reminded that using Chrome, and by extension all Google products, is just a bad idea.

jefftk 7y ago

If you read the links I posted above, Chrome's plan is not "implement fingerprinting resistance while leaving third party cookies alone". It's "implement fingerprinting resistance, add new APIs that give privacy preserving ways of doing some of the things third party cookies are used for today, and remove third party cookies".

blackearl 7y ago
The problem is Google tracking, not just third parties.
- jefftk 7y ago
  Google ads don't have any special access in Chrome. They use regular cookies.
  - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
    Why would Google even need to use cookies inside of its own browser which is linked to your personal identity? It's like saying Facebook uses regular cookies on its own website to figure out which pages you visit. I guess they could, but they already have your page view history so it's kind of pointless. If anything it sounds like a red herring argument.
    - jefftk 7y ago
      Facebook does use cookies to handle identity on their website; that's how they know you're you. Google's ad networks do use cookies for ad targeting, even in Chrome.
      - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
        I'm not saying they don't. I'm saying they have a litany of other tools (I've spoken at length with engineers at Facebook about how they do this) that really make those unnecessary. Obviously you know more about how Google does it, and admittedly ads is not my wheelhouse at all. But from what I understand: it's overkill. If you can point me towards a source that discusses the technical details of how Google tracks its users, I'd be interested in reading it.
        jefftk 7y ago
        > I'm saying they have a litany of other tools (I've spoken at length with engineers at Facebook about how they do this) that really make those unnecessary. That's not how identity works on the web. Cookies are how every site tracks logged-in identity, including Facebook. To test this, clear your facebook.com cookies and observe that you're logged out.