169
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] archonet@lemy.lol 195 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

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.

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 55 points 1 month ago

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.

[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago

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.

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

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?

[-] Skydancer@pawb.social 6 points 1 month ago

That would be true for competent web developers. Unfortunately, those are a vanishingly small subset.

[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

No, they'll just see the management summary that Firefox occupies less than 0.5% of their users' marketshare and prioritize their budget accordingly.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

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

Explain how this comment isn't completely wrong

[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

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

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month 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

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 month 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.

[-] jherazob@fedia.io 28 points 1 month ago

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

[-] Drewski@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 month ago

Ladybird isn't ready yet but one to keep an eye on.

[-] azdalen@beehaw.org 1 points 1 month ago

unfortunately, its based on c++... so could be a security nightmare unless they are very very careful :|

[-] outerspace@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago

What do you think chrome and safari are written in?

[-] azdalen@beehaw.org 1 points 1 month ago

To my knowledge, the chromium devs have said (and i am paraphrasing here) that maintaining such a large C++ codebase from a security standpoint is a figurative nightmare. I think they have only recently begun to start migrating some code to rust or other languages (i'm not 100% if they were also looking into Zig)

[-] wdx@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago

Pivot to suggesting to rewrite it in Rust in 3...2...1...

[-] tabular@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

Note: "I don't use Discord/Datcord anymore because of their terrible TOS which Datcord can't protect you from."

[-] dxc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

Thanks I didn't know about Datcord

load more comments (26 replies)
[-] aard@kyu.de 35 points 1 month ago

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

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Nope, sorry. That technical hurdle is easily solved. In reality, this is about advertising and snooping.

[-] corbin@infosec.pub 29 points 1 month ago

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.

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 13 points 1 month ago

Yeah, this is a loss for user privacy.

[-] Contravariant@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Also a reminder that accepting an alternative tracking method is likely to just end up with 2 different ways to track you rather than one slightly less invasive one.

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month 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.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

I think that's a matter of perspective. IMO it didn't work, it was broken, that's why we're even talking about it.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
169 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

34360 readers
164 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS