Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

vivaldi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 216 posts

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#81

Post by mike_d »

EMM_386 wrote: post #32

I don't see how the entire FLoC concept can succeed. There is zero incentive for Chromium forks, let alone any other browser vendor, to implement/leave-in this technology. For other browser vendors, it is zero-effort to not support it. For Chromium forks, implementing it is zero effort but also comes with the same negative gain it would have for other vendors (that end-users are blind to). Unless you consider "more r…

100% of a browsers revenue comes from advertising. Nobody pays $24.95 for a boxed copy of Netscape Navigator anymore.

In negotiating an exclusive search advertising deal, not supporting FLoC will decrease the overall value of the browsers users to the ad network.

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#82

Post by readams »

kristofferR wrote: post #54
Emendo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, the only browser that could ignore FLoC without being blocked by website is Safari. If Safari chooses not to implement FLoC, it might be sufficient to prevent web developers from blocking other non-FLoC browsers. All of this rest on Apple standing up for privacy through.. so watch for any announcements from Apple.

Privacy has been Apple's thing the last few years though, very unlike that they implement FLoC.

iOS ads use a system very similar for FLoC though. It's unlikely they'll implement it, but not because of privacy reasons.

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#83

Post by type0 »

luke2m wrote: post #73
EMM_386 wrote: post #32

I don't see how the entire FLoC concept can succeed. There is zero incentive for Chromium forks, let alone any other browser vendor, to implement/leave-in this technology. For other browser vendors, it is zero-effort to not support it. For Chromium forks, implementing it is zero effort but also comes with the same negative gain it would have for other vendors (that end-users are blind to). Unless you consider "more r…

>There is zero incentive for Chromium forks, let alone any other browser vendor, to implement/leave-in this technology. Chrome has a 60-70% market share on its own. Most people don’t even know the difference between “the internet” “the www” and “chrome” So, there is zero incentive for the 30% of non-chrome browsers, but most of the people who don’t use adblockers anyway will be sucked into this.

Correctemento, for non technical users Chrome is the window to the internet (it used to be Internet Explorer).

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#84

Post by approxim8ion »

rufugee wrote: post #78

Anyone using Vivaldi full-time? As a Firefox user, I find I have to install a number of third-party extensions to get some basic functionality that Vivaldi has out of the box (ad-blocking, note taking). Anyone made the switch, and, if so, can you share your experience?

Vivaldi is very feature-rich and smooth, but I cannot in good conscience use a proprietary browser as long as good open-source alternatives exist. Also, I'm just used to my custom firefox setup, I guess. I find it worth the initial time outlay to set it up, and of course there is the option of just carrying over your profiles to the new device.

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#85

Post by thedanbob »

rufugee wrote: post #78

Anyone using Vivaldi full-time? As a Firefox user, I find I have to install a number of third-party extensions to get some basic functionality that Vivaldi has out of the box (ad-blocking, note taking). Anyone made the switch, and, if so, can you share your experience?

I've been using Vivaldi full-time for a few months and I find it very pleasant. It took me a while to get used to the sidebar but now I appreciate having it. Ditto with how it reopens your last session's tabs by default.

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#86

Post by crazypython »

dleslie wrote: post #22
tobyjsullivan wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if that's because there's no short way to describe FLoC in a way that makes it sound bad for users. They'd need one paragraph to introduce FLoC, then another three making nuanced arguments about how it's actually worse than the status quo, and only then could they get to the core post about not supporting it. Better to avoid that fire and just let the reader infer FLoC is bad, whatever it is.

FLoC is a granular identifier that groups users into cohorts of a few dozen thousand based upon their recent browsing history, allowing advertisers to uniquely identify users with only a few additional bits of information _and_ more easily collaborate to identify a user's browsing history. That wasn't hard.

I just don't like how FLoC was implemented. No opt-in or opt-out consent. Written completely by Google employees. Not approved by Privacy Interest Group, Web Technical Architecture Group, or WICG. No control over which cohort you are in, despite being able to add this feature.

If it was complemented with a Privacy Budget API– each privacy-losing API call costs budget and there is a limit– to eliminate other factors for fingerprinting and IDing that you can combine with FLoC to unique track people– thus giving advertisers complete browsing history– then I'd reconsider.

Another thing is webmasters can opt-out of FLoC through a header. But many webmasters don't control headers...

And on top of the practical consequences of its implementation.... not good.

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#87

Post by neogodless »

Natfan wrote: post #74
neogodless wrote: post #11

The article links to FLoC[0] but the site gives me a 404. I used Google, a popular web search engine, to discover what FLoC stands for[1]. > Federated Learning of Cohorts > a new way to make your browser do the profiling that third-party trackers used to do themselves: in this case, boiling down your recent browsing activity into a behavioral label, and then sharing it with websites and advertisers [0] https://blog.g…

Don't take this the wrong way, but did you really need to explain what Google (Search) is?

I can't answer for anyone else, but I suspect they already knew. It was a bit tongue-in-cheek, putting a spin on what Google really is (a monopolistic internet advertising empire, profiting off detailed information about as many internet users as possible.)

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#88

Post by type0 »

nickysielicki wrote: post #76
sanxiyn wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is buying service (traffic) from Mozilla. It is not a donation.

That doesn't change the fact that if Google stopped selling their ads, Mozilla would have to stop paying their developers.

> Mozilla would have to stop paying their developers.

Well they are almost there, wouldn't be surprised if there are no developers left pretty soon

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#89

Post by drusepth »

Emendo wrote: post #47
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #28

"Please switch to a browser that supports FLoC to view this page." [Links to Chrome, etc.] "This website requires a browser that supports FLoC. Please install one of the folllowing compatible browsers: " [Links for Chrome, etc.] "We've detected you are using a browser that does not support FLoC. Please update your browser to use this website." [Links to Chrome, etc.] "Your browser is outdated! Please upgrade." [Links…

At this point, the only browser that could ignore FLoC without being blocked by website is Safari. If Safari chooses not to implement FLoC, it might be sufficient to prevent web developers from blocking other non-FLoC browsers. All of this rest on Apple standing up for privacy through.. so watch for any announcements from Apple.

Why wouldn't sites that rely on FLoC block Safari if the browser doesn't implement it?

Re: The Vivaldi browser will not support Google’s FLoC

#90

Post by nitrogen »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #68
Ajedi32 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You definitely could. Though apparently in incognito mode it's recommended that browsers just throw an exception rather than provide fake data: https://github.com/WICG/floc/blob/dcd4c042fa6a81b048e04a78b1...

Of course the FLoC team would want browsers to throw an exception, since that wouldn't damage the perceived legitimacy of FLoC. But as a user I'd rather feed them false data if possible.

There are quite a few ways for a site to distinguish private/incognito from normal browsing, and IMO these differences should be treated as bugs. Indeed, these differences often break sites (including a vaccine registration site) that should work fine. We don't need even more ways for sites to break in private/incognito mode.
Post reply on HN