271–280 of 396 posts
This is actually something that browsers can mitigate. Allow users to give tracking permissions not only for subdomains, but also for paths. Deny: google.com/* Allow: google.com/flights Something like that.
Yeah but, the biggest browser is Chrome, by Google; they have an incentive to allow tracking and access across their services.
I got this a couple of years ago, and noticed immediately. Just as quickly denied the request, because I have fingers and can type my current address. It's a minor inconvenience.
> because I have fingers and can type my current address How would you always know your current address? I often use maps with gps to find out where I am. Many places have no address .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but, the biggest browser is Chrome, by Google; they have an incentive to allow tracking and access across their services.
Indeed. If you use Chrome, you should just assume that your location is shared with Google at all times, since they likely collect it via telemetry anyway. If you use Firefox, assume your location is always shared with Mozilla via telemetry... and likely indirectly to Google as well, since they use Google Analytics for so much of their infra. Likewise for Apple/Google/Microsoft collecting data from iOS/macOS/Android/…
And even a compiler you wrote yourself from scratch isn't necessarily verifiable unless you designed from scratch the hardware that you used to write it. Almost nobody knows what those Management Engines are doing!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obviously YMMV. I live about 1 mile from suburbs in a town called Bingley in Yorkshire, England. I can't trust Google maps locally (though its good for local business searches), as the mapping quality is terrible. My village and local town have roads missing, numerous public rights of way missing (over both public and private land). Major areas of trees missing. OSM is much, much better. See the difference: https://i…
> OSM with OSRM or Grasshopper Is this usable on mobile? Can you tell a bit more?
It's a very strange move indeed. maps.google.com implies an application lives there, far better than being on the root domain. It also means that when you start typing maps.google, you'd get all your history searchable related to maps, although arguably that's useless. I can't think of a reason why this would be a good technical move for Google (ignoring the don't do evil thingie), other than simplifying... certifica…
google.com/maps is simpler to type on a mobile phone and more consumer friendly, I’ve always used google.com/ pattern, way easier to leverage autocomplete, type a g to autocomplete google.com then if you are looking for flights type f and in 2-3 clicks you are on google.com/flights
dns segments are shown backwards for a reason. it was done so that the most specific part shows up first when searching for something.
I have to admit as a data structure snob. I vaguely wish it were the other way around, sigh, as much as I hate to admit it java classes got it right. I also have to admit it does not really matter that much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This makes perfect sense product wise, if I'm searching "bakery" on my mobile phone I probably want the ones around me and not the generic location-agnostic google search of it, just like I would if I was searching on map. Matter of fact, this is actually something I do a couple times a month, search then clic the maps tab to see localized results then from them click the website result to find their webpage. As a te…
> if I'm searching "bakery" on my mobile phone I probably want the ones around me Only when you're using a phone? Only if you're not at home? What if you want to find out what a bakery is? (Apologies for rapid fire, I'm not having a go at you, just curious)
One could show a map preview of local results, which can be expanded as well as generic search results below/aside/...
Recently safari (on macos 10.15) started auto completing „maps.“ to „maps.apple.com“, although I only tried Apple maps once and always use gmaps. Maybe google noticed this and tries to circumvent safari‘s „preference“ for Apple Maps
Isn't maps.apple.com in your bookmarks? Most browsers suggest from bookmarks before anything else. Maybe it got added there in an update to. you know, improve your experience with the Apple ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I see it, people deserve the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their motivations but corporations don't.
Perhaps you mean persons deserve the benefit of the doubt? People seems to be the root problem. I expect there is no difference between an individual and a corporation operated by a sole individual. If one is trustworthy, they will remain equally trustworthy if they happen to have a stock certificate in hand. The corporation isn't able to act autonomously. It acts with equivalency to the person it is represented by.…
If a local dealer does something bad they quickly receive corresponding response.
A big corp is detached and anonymous. As long as there is no broad boycott there are rare cases where response really reaches them.
If a big corp has a sales force the sales force is responsive to feedback, however the corp then quickly turns anonymous to them and whatever they put in the system doesn't reach the right places ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you need OSM on Android, I can recommend: - "Organic Maps" (a fork of the old MapsMe codebase) if you want a clean, simple user experience - "OSMAnd" if you want a very powerful, highly customizable map application, which comes at the cost of a steeper learning curve Both apps are open source and support navigation, offline maps and POI search. The things I miss most compared to Google Maps is live traffic informa…
Lets not forget StreetComplete is a dead easy app to use to help contribute to OSM. It just asks you a few questions like "is this bench still here" or "is there a bike lane on this road" etc https://streetcomplete.app/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google could enable ESNI, if they wanted.
I presume they are talking about the DNS "leak". google.com/maps would result in a DNS request for google.com so anyone monitoring DNS would know they are connecting to a google service but wouldn't know which one. maps.google.com would result in a DNS request that show they are connecting to maps.google.com and could presume they want some maps. DoH (and ESNI on the server side) would fix it, but iirc Chrome (the mo…
It would fix it for some specific circumstances. Since maps.google.com resolves differently than www.google.com, you can ignore DNS and just look at TCP connections to tell what service is being talked to.