4 ms·

You don't seem to understand what "I don’t want websites to be able to send notifications to my phone." means.

by melq 6y ago

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
The point is that you don't represent everybody, yet the browser gives you a choice instead of forcing you to do something.
- prepend 6y ago
  The point is that few want this and Chrome make a default behavior that inconveniences lots of users. Chrome should default not to prompt. Safari estimates that no one wants this, and I suspect they’re right.
  - onion2k 6y ago
    Chrome should default not to prompt. It absolutely should. Making the default "never prompt" would lead to websites prompting users to modify their preferences and change security settings. We do not want to normalize that behaviour. It would be a security nightmare. The defaults might be a little annoying for users (who can switch it to never prompt if they want to) but keeping average users who do want email or chat notifications safe online should take priority.
    - prepend 6y ago
      I don’t think average users want email or chat notifications. And I don’t think web sites would prompt this as they don’t on Safari and that works out ok. I think Chrome defaults stuff that Google thinks makes advertisers more money and Google more money. Safari defaults stuff that Apple thinks users want.
onion2k 6y ago
If you block a website sending you Chrome notifications it blocks notifications for all your Chrome installations, including your phone. If you turn notifications off for Chrome everywhere you won't see Chrome web notifications anywhere. If you're talking about some other way websites can send notifications to your phone then I don't think that has anything to do with Chrome. And I can't think of what mechanism you're talking about.
- melq 6y ago
  My point is that the person said "I don't want websites to be able to send notifications to my phone", and then you responded by explaining how one can prevent such notifications via configuration. That is true, but not really relevant to what he said. He didn't say "I wish there was a way to configure my browser to not send notifications to my phone". You then followed up with a snarky line telling them the thing that bothers them doesn't actually bother them, and that wasn't great either.
  - ralusek 6y ago
    If I said "I don't want bears to be able to maul me in my sleep," and someone said "here's an option you can check which prevents that from ever happening," please explain to me how that failed to solve my problem.
    - melq 6y ago
      OP didn't say "I want to prevent chrome from sending notifications". If he did, then sure, having an option toggle would solve his problem. But that's not what he said. He said he doesn't want chrome to be able to push notifications to his phone. Having an option to disable that feature means it is has to be possible in the first place. Maybe I am being overly pedantic, but to me the distinction matters.
      - egeozcan 6y ago
        Then it should be said "I don't want Chrome pushing notifications on anyone's phone, ever". If you want it for yourself, you can make it happen. If you change a setting that disables ALL notifications for Chrome in your Android phone, your condition is satisfied. Chrome is not able to send notifications, unless the developers find a workaround :) I want selected websites to be pushing notifications to me through Firefox. For example ebay-kleinanzeigen. Why should I install an app for that purpose?
        melq 6y ago
danShumway 6y ago
You'd rather install the website as a native app so that it has even more device access and then allow it to send notifications to your phone? Is that really a cleaner, less intrusive UX for you then it would be to have an easily ignorable button next to a website's address bar that would allow you to turn notifications on or off for each website with maybe three or four clicks at max?
- oji0hub 6y ago
  > You'd rather install the website as a native app so that it has even more device access and then allow it to send notifications to your phone? I can always chose not to install an app. > Is that really a cleaner, less intrusive UX for... Imho it's a security question. I don't care if it's clean or less intrusive, the browser should be a sandbox.
  - danShumway 6y ago
    > I can always chose not to install an app. Sure, but I can also choose not to use a website or service. If a set of features is only available in a specific medium (whether that's a website or an app) your choice is the same -- you either use it in that medium or you don't. > the browser should be a sandbox. This is an interesting point, because I do get where you're coming from, but I almost draw the opposite conclusion from the same data. The browser is a sandbox, so I want to put things in it. I refuse to install a native app to check my bank balance or post on social media, I don't trust those companies with that level of access to my phone. The browser is a better sandbox than my native device, and notifications don't really break the browser sandbox in any significant way. So if (as heavyset_go suggests) notifications are the difference between having an app built in the sandbox or out of it, then I want notifications, because I want the app to be built in the sandbox. If having notifications could make it feasible to use Twitter without installing an app, then great, we should do that. Or if notifications are enough that I don't need to have an email app or Matrix client installed... it's a pretty substantial win for security if I can get rid of those apps on my phone and use them as mobile progressive websites instead. Having email notifications on my phone is mandatory for me, I can't drop that feature. But is that alone a good reason to install a completely separate application that's requesting filesystem access or contact access?

You don't seem to understand what "I don’t want websites to be able to send notifications to my phone." means.

by melq 6y ago

You don't seem to understand what "I don’t want websites to be able to send notifications to my phone." means.

The point is that you don't represent everybody, yet the browser gives you a choice instead of forcing you to do something.

prepend 6y ago
The point is that few want this and Chrome make a default behavior that inconveniences lots of users. Chrome should default not to prompt. Safari estimates that no one wants this, and I suspect they’re right.
- onion2k 6y ago
  Chrome should default not to prompt. It absolutely should. Making the default "never prompt" would lead to websites prompting users to modify their preferences and change security settings. We do not want to normalize that behaviour. It would be a security nightmare. The defaults might be a little annoying for users (who can switch it to never prompt if they want to) but keeping average users who do want email or chat notifications safe online should take priority.
  - prepend 6y ago
    I don’t think average users want email or chat notifications. And I don’t think web sites would prompt this as they don’t on Safari and that works out ok. I think Chrome defaults stuff that Google thinks makes advertisers more money and Google more money. Safari defaults stuff that Apple thinks users want.

onion2k 6y ago

If you block a website sending you Chrome notifications it blocks notifications for all your Chrome installations, including your phone. If you turn notifications off for Chrome everywhere you won't see Chrome web notifications anywhere. If you're talking about some other way websites can send notifications to your phone then I don't think that has anything to do with Chrome. And I can't think of what mechanism you're talking about.

melq 6y ago
My point is that the person said "I don't want websites to be able to send notifications to my phone", and then you responded by explaining how one can prevent such notifications via configuration. That is true, but not really relevant to what he said. He didn't say "I wish there was a way to configure my browser to not send notifications to my phone". You then followed up with a snarky line telling them the thing that bothers them doesn't actually bother them, and that wasn't great either.
- ralusek 6y ago
  If I said "I don't want bears to be able to maul me in my sleep," and someone said "here's an option you can check which prevents that from ever happening," please explain to me how that failed to solve my problem.
  - melq 6y ago
    OP didn't say "I want to prevent chrome from sending notifications". If he did, then sure, having an option toggle would solve his problem. But that's not what he said. He said he doesn't want chrome to be able to push notifications to his phone. Having an option to disable that feature means it is has to be possible in the first place. Maybe I am being overly pedantic, but to me the distinction matters.
    - egeozcan 6y ago
      Then it should be said "I don't want Chrome pushing notifications on anyone's phone, ever". If you want it for yourself, you can make it happen. If you change a setting that disables ALL notifications for Chrome in your Android phone, your condition is satisfied. Chrome is not able to send notifications, unless the developers find a workaround :) I want selected websites to be pushing notifications to me through Firefox. For example ebay-kleinanzeigen. Why should I install an app for that purpose?
      - melq 6y ago

danShumway 6y ago

You'd rather install the website as a native app so that it has even more device access and then allow it to send notifications to your phone? Is that really a cleaner, less intrusive UX for you then it would be to have an easily ignorable button next to a website's address bar that would allow you to turn notifications on or off for each website with maybe three or four clicks at max?

oji0hub 6y ago
> You'd rather install the website as a native app so that it has even more device access and then allow it to send notifications to your phone? I can always chose not to install an app. > Is that really a cleaner, less intrusive UX for... Imho it's a security question. I don't care if it's clean or less intrusive, the browser should be a sandbox.
- danShumway 6y ago
  > I can always chose not to install an app. Sure, but I can also choose not to use a website or service. If a set of features is only available in a specific medium (whether that's a website or an app) your choice is the same -- you either use it in that medium or you don't. > the browser should be a sandbox. This is an interesting point, because I do get where you're coming from, but I almost draw the opposite conclusion from the same data. The browser is a sandbox, so I want to put things in it. I refuse to install a native app to check my bank balance or post on social media, I don't trust those companies with that level of access to my phone. The browser is a better sandbox than my native device, and notifications don't really break the browser sandbox in any significant way. So if (as heavyset_go suggests) notifications are the difference between having an app built in the sandbox or out of it, then I want notifications, because I want the app to be built in the sandbox. If having notifications could make it feasible to use Twitter without installing an app, then great, we should do that. Or if notifications are enough that I don't need to have an email app or Matrix client installed... it's a pretty substantial win for security if I can get rid of those apps on my phone and use them as mobile progressive websites instead. Having email notifications on my phone is mandatory for me, I can't drop that feature. But is that alone a good reason to install a completely separate application that's requesting filesystem access or contact access?