• Engywuck@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Everybody with basic reading abilities already knew that “incognito” is just “not saving stuff locally”. Sites can track you regardlessly. With any browser.

  • Elise@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Honestly I thought it would send out a no tracking flag. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is or will be illegal to ignore that flag in some jurisdictions.

    • Wilker
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      Do-Not-Track requests is nothing but a header on GET. at best, it’s useless, with exceptions from websites that already barely track you. at worst, it’s another data point for fingerprinting your browser.

    • Cait
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      The Please don’t track me Mr Google flag

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The change is being made as Google prepares to settle a class-action lawsuit that accuses the firm of privacy violations related to Chrome’s Incognito mode.

    This won’t change how data is collected by websites you visit and the services they use, including Google."

    The stable and Canary warnings both say that your browsing activity might still be visible to “websites you visit,” “your employer or school,” or “your Internet service provider.”

    We asked Google when the warning will be added to Chrome’s stable channel and whether the change is mandated by or related to the pending settlement of the privacy class-action suit.

    Incognito mode in Chrome will continue to give people the choice to browse the Internet without their activity being saved to their browser or device."

    On December 26, 2023, Google and the plaintiffs announced that they reached a settlement that they planned to present to the court for approval within 60 days.


    The original article contains 545 words, the summary contains 154 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • BlanK0@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I don’t even use google anymore, I am currently using brave search (actually pretty good).

    Not sure in terms of privacy if they respect that much but in my perspective brave aggregates results by themselves instead of just using the google or bing results so they are at least a decent alternative.

    Also the ai integration has been good in the search results imo.

      • fl42v@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Although, I believe that’s about their browser. Also, ddg’s browser was far from advertised, as far as I remember.

        In other words, librewolf/arkenfox. Maybe also ungoogled chromium, but seems like too much of a hustle to me.

  • pewgar_seemsimandroid
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    google is olny ducktaped to a requirement in the privacy community because of YouTube pretty much nobody in the privacy community is using google or is even planning to use google but there’s YouTube and mabye google forums