• @bus_factor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1833 months ago

    Pretty sure it’s always been upfront with that it still tracks you? I always thought of it as a “don’t store history and cookies locally” thing and nothing more. Maybe I read that disclaimer with more cynicism than most?

    • magic_lobster_party
      link
      fedilink
      663 months ago

      Yeah, it has always been the “don’t log my porn activity” mode. I don’t understand how so many people misinterpret it as some kind of privacy protection mode.

      • TheRealKuni
        link
        fedilink
        English
        343 months ago

        Yeah, it has always been the “don’t log my porn activity” mode. I don’t understand how so many people misinterpret it as some kind of privacy protection mode.

        Well, also the “log into your accounts on someone else’s machine without storing the account in the browser” mode. Or the “shop for your partner’s gifts without leaving a trail” mode. But yeah, primarily for porn.

    • @lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      213 months ago

      Yeah I feel the same way.

      I admit that I know quite a bit about computers and such but I thought everyone knew private mode isn’t intended to stop any tracking.

      Pretty sure some browsers by default enable extra tracking protections when in private mode but that’s just an extra feature.

    • @Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      163 months ago

      Yeah, most websites do fingerprinting. I doubt Firefox is immune to it either. In fact, it probably makes it worse since there’s so few people using it.

      https://amiunique.org/fingerprint shows me as being unique in both browsers, and that’s without even taking into account IP address which narrows you down to people on your connection anyway. Only a VPN will hide that.

      They don’t need cookies to track your visits. Yet apparently they still need to ask if you want to share data with 2184 trusted data partners every time you visit without them, so maybe they can pack that the fuck in.

    • tb_
      link
      fedilink
      English
      103 months ago

      it’s always been upfront

      The language it uses/used to use was rather ambiguous, especially for less tech savvy people.

      Perhaps it wasn’t false, but it definitely wasn’t upfront.

        • tb_
          link
          fedilink
          English
          33 months ago

          You do know they updated it soon after this became a major thing, right?

          • magic_lobster_party
            link
            fedilink
            10
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            That linked picture is at least from 2017 from a quick research. What they clarify now in the latest update is that Google is not exempt from tracking your activity.

          • @null@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            63 months ago

            I don’t know that actually. I recall similar wording going back to when Incognito tabs were launched.

            Got a source on that?

            • tb_
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Google quietly updates Chrome’s incognito warning in wake of tracking lawsuit

              […]

              Here’s the updated text (emphasis added):

              “Others who use this device won’t see your activity, so you can browse more privately. This won’t change how data is collected by websites you visit and the services they use, including Google. Downloads, bookmarks and reading list items will be saved.

              https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/16/24039883/google-incognito-mode-tracking-lawsuit-notice-change

              The text in that article is different from your screenshot, I don’t know what’s up with that. Perhaps it’s regional.

              • @null@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                73 months ago

                I believe the one I posted is older, based on the logo.

                So looks like they’ve updated multiple times, each more reader-friendly than the last…

          • @conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            They might have changed the wording, but it’s been insanely clear for many years, and it never at any point implied it changed anything about what websites did.

            • tb_
              link
              fedilink
              English
              13 months ago

              You and I may have known, but

              it’s been insanely clear for many years

              If it had been clear it wouldn’t have become an issue.

              • @conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                13 months ago

                It isn’t an issue. The exact wording might have changed, but the content has been identical for years and years. It included “sites and others who can see your traffic can do whatever the hell they want” the whole time, in entirely unambiguous idiot proof language.

                This is an imaginary horseshit lawsuit. It was not possible to read the very obvious text and be misled about what incognito mode did or didn’t do at any point, and it was automatically displayed in every tab. There was never at any point any possible room for confusion.