• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle



  • I don’t disagree as such, and I won’t use Chrome, but objectively it is better than what we had in Chrome. While many of us refuse/block ads/tracking completely, many users will now have better privacy with ads that are not micro-targeted on their individual but more broadly targeted with a generalised interest area that varies per visit and adjusts over time to keep it relevant.

    IF a user doesn’t disable ads completely, this seems a decent way to make the ads somewhat relevant to the user without the horrible tracking methods in use today. Objectively that’s a better state than seeing ads for something completely irrelevant to the user. Again, this is not relevant for most of us in here, and I sincerely hope most of us don’t use a Chrome-based browser to begin with, but for the average internet user, for whom this is designed, I’d argue it’s a net positive.


  • It’s a little ridiculous how people misunderstand this issue. This is literally to do away with the extremely privacy-invasive tracking that has been done using cookies and telemetry for years. You will be tracked less in Chrome than you did before, because the browser will hand off less information to sites you visit and there will be a degree of randomisation. This is to get rid of cookies soon, and to randomise the information a site gets when you visit instead of the whole deal.

    It is, of course, more personalised than blocking all cookies and randomising telemetry, but if you were doing that, I expect you weren’t using Chrome to begin with. Using a Chrome browser with Topics is inherently more privacy-forward than using Chrome as it has been so far. Honestly, I hope that the deprecation of cookies will even help *Fox users down the lines as they become irrelevant to a large part of the web users.

    If you want a solid explanation of what is actually happening with Topics, Security Now episode 935 explains the details. The transcript dives into Topics on page 9, explains the technicalities on page 12 and if you just want the conclusion, you can skip to the penultimate page and read the last few paragraphs in here: https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-935-notes.pdf (you can listen as well if you’d rather.)

    Unlike Web Integrity Protection this is a reasonable step in the right direction. Can it break down the line? Sure. But then we’re back at where we were. Meanwhile, I’ll continue to use Firefox and Safari and hope that this will eventually help stop the cookie banner nightmare on those browsers as well (even if the cookies do nothing.)



  • First of all, this is good. Secondly, clearly the tech bro writing this clearly seems to have mixed up governing bodies. The reason why the EU is taking on the tech bullshit is because the people making the moves actually are young enough to understand the problems while old enough to care.

    That said, there have certainly been implementation issues such as ignoring illegal cookie banners to this day without bringing down the hammer. The site with the story served up a rare compliant one, but most consent forms do not live up to the rules and it has gone on for too long. Still, they are moving in the right direction most of the time.


  • I know this will probably be unpopular, but that’s part of why I’m throwing it in here. Microsoft ToDo started out as a hot pile of garbage after they took over a great to-do app. These days it’s genuinely pretty great, though. Especially if part of what you do involves Outlook or Exchange. You can flag mails and have them show up in a to-do section, it will semi-intelligently suggest things to do next based on things in your to do-list, if you use planner or tasks at work, your things will show up in ToDo as well. I don’t use it for personal stuff, because having the option to quickly have Siri add something in Reminders is super convenient, but other than that it’s definitely a useful option - especially if you don’t use a voice assistant.