From my Google feed — Forbes recently published Why You Should Stop Using Google Chrome After Shock Update
(yes, forbes - and others - using clickbait title as usual)
Visual TL;DR
➔ For a neat visual summary (via tweet)
My TL;DR:
- Chrome's plan to greatly reduce data collection pushed back 2+ years
- However, the plan actually introduces “significant [fingerprinting] risks"
- Chrome currently harvests by far the most data from its users
- 100% of Chrome collected data is linked to you, personally
- Harvested data linked to you include:
- Your Location
- Your Browsing History
- Your Audio Data
While there's a lot to recommend Google Chrome (65% global share), user privacy unsurprisingly is not it's strongest feature, thanks to the nature of its business model.
Quotes from the piece:
Google’s Privacy Sandbox blogs highlight that third-party cookies undermine user privacy, yet they’re allowed by default in Chrome. — Security researchers Tommy Mysk and Talal Haj Bakry
“Chrome is the only major browser that doesn’t offer meaningful protection from tracking,” … introduces “significant [fingerprinting] risks.” — Mozilla
Of course, people fall into the usual categories with stuff like this:
- Those who care enough about privacy to shift browsers
- Those who don't care too deeply and are perfectly happy to continue being fingerprinted/profiled for targeted marketing/messaging
- Those who don't know better or seriously just can't be bothered
- I probably missed at least one other category
I'm curious which categories many of us in OzB fall under?
EDIT:
For those thinking it's too hard to shift browsers, it only takes a minute or so to transfer bookmarks, etc.
FWIW, I use Google products significantly for work, and for this I specifically prefer to use Chrome, e.g., Google My Business, Analytics, Search Console, Ads, Drive, etc. For everything else, I use Safari, Firefox… and now that I know it exists(!), the DuckDuckGo browser.
@eug:
I'm almost certain such studies exist, but without insider access/knowledge, it will be a challenge to verify empirically.
My opinion only: at all times.
Though I wish it were so simple.
Masses historically - definitely pre-Internet - can and have been manipulated by governments, their thinking swayed by the information presented to them. Or hidden from them.
Is that level of manipulation possible now? If not overtly then subtly?
So while I think every person is responsible for their own actions, they can still be subtly influenced / manipulated by the information made available / unavailable (also influenced by their own actions), with the help of algorithms.
Def only my 2c.