all 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 195 points 2 years ago* (44 children)

This is your daily reminder that Firefox and its derivatives exist and should be used wherever possible if you care about Google not having a monopoly over the internet. There's even a Firefox-based version of Discord called Datcord.

  • source
  • hideshow 44 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Absolutely. If you think you can switch when chrome will be completely hostile it will be too late.

    The reason they are trying those things in chrome is because the market share of Firefox is currently low. They are counting that you won't have the option to run Firefox anymore, because sites will stop supporting it. Don't let that happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Also, Firefox is in a tough situation where they have to purposefully shoot themselves in the foot, because their builtin tracking protection means Firefox usually doesn't show up in a lot of browser usage stats.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I didn't think about it, though if that makes it harder to track it (can't they just check the user agent?) could that actually be good, as the sites will never know exactly how many users they will lose, so might be more hesitant to pull the trigger?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    That blocks user agent string? Answer: no it absolutely doesn't

    Explain how this comment isn't completely wrong

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    If you use a third-party analytics service such as Google Analytics, as almost all serious parties do (with their nice dashboards and reports), then you'll notice Firefox is severely underrepresented because the request never reaches Google

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    I think that may be true if you set the privacy protection to strict, which is not default.

    I wonder if it's underrepresented more so because people who use Firefox are more likely to install privacy centric extensions

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    Too late. Lumen5 crashes on Firefox. Google Cloud Console barely loads. I was a Firefox user for YEARS but finally had to uninstall this week. The amount of "Firefox is not supported" warnings and weird issues I was running into every day was getting a tad ridiculous.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Firefox is the only reasonable alternative to the Chrome monopoly right now, yes, but they too are going bad, we need more alternatives

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (26 replies)
    [–] 35 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    They probably couldn't get google drive to work without 3rd party cookies.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 23 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)
  • [+] 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • [+] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    I'd imagine that making it a user choice gets around some of the regulatory hurdles in some way. I can see them making a popup in the future to not use third-party cookies anymore (or partition per site them like Firefox does) but then they can say that it's not Google making these changes, it's the user making that choice. If you're right that there's few that would answer yes, then it gets them the same effective result for most users without being seen to force a change on their competitors in the ad industry.

    What's the UK CMA going to do, argue that users shouldn't be given choices about how they are tracked or how their own browser operates?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Google worked on Privacy Sandbox/Topics API/FLoC for at least five years, and it couldn't get something that advertisers, regulators, and users could all agree on, so it's just falling back to the thing that worked (but has next to zero privacy protections). Sigh.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    Google never had any intention whatsoever of prioritising your privacy over their advertising revenue. This technology was 100% designed to shut other operators out of the tracking and advertising market and 0% to reduce their ability to track you and advertise to you. Never in a million years were they going to spend a lot of time, effort and money destroying the source of their money. Hobble competitors, yes. Hobble themselves? Never. Not even a little bit.

  • source
  • parent