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

Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 167 posts

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#131

Post by keepamovin »

tellarin wrote: post #123
keepamovin wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're interested in utilizing your history information for something in your intentional interests, consider saving an archive of pages you browse to make a search engine you can query back through later. You can save the full content for indexing with full text search, and you can even export archives as tarballs by zipping up the directory. Many people find this a useful way to "mine" their own browser history…

https://pinboard.in is my go-to for this sort of thing.

Didn’t something happen to that guy, or the site went down? Or was that something else. The one i linked is self hosted, but a Saas version definitely is interesting.

Does your one have archiving and search??

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#132

Post by MongoTheMad »

nunez wrote: post #130

What's the point. Yeah, these kinds of "features" are horribly invasive and anti-consumer, but so, so, so many people just could not give less of a shit as long as they can hit up Facebook or YouTube or whatever work requires them to visit. It's not like the early 00s when Firefox rose to dominance because IE sucked so badly in comparison. Chrome is not only the best and "most-compliant" web browser (isn't it awesome…

Parks are excellent places to enjoy life.

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#133

Post by hn92726819 »

sumedh wrote: post #126
mangecoeur wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been using Firefox since version 2.x and I never understood what downsides people find with it. I've used chrome and the only difference i saw was annoying pushes from google to log in so that i could be tracked all the time. Otherwise, it shows web pages, what more do you want?

> I have been using Firefox since version 2.x and I never understood what downsides people find with it. For some weird reason somes sites just dont open on Firefox on my work computer when I connect to the company VPN on it. Safari and Chrome can open all sites just fine. I really want to use Firefox especially for the container feature but just cannot figure out why somes sites dont work when I on the vpn.

When you say don't open, what do you mean? Sometimes companies configure their SSL cert in only safari and chrome, so you might be able to just add it to Firefox's store.

It could be that the proxy is set up as a non-system proxy too, so you could try checking Chrome's configured proxy and setting it in settings.

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#134

Post by offices »

timrichard wrote: post #122
offices wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Chrome at work and Firefox at home, the only features I missed were low-effort 'translate this page' and extensionless reverse image search. Wise Google have decided to remove the second point by replacing it with terrible Lens. The differences aren't really important any more. Both have converged on similar UIs, both have important privacy extensions, both have password managers and payment storage. My only ca…

I installed Brave the other day, and it has a page translation feature.

That's promising: I've so far only tried it when it was young and unstable

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#135

Post by akyuu »

maleldil wrote: post #100
tacker2000 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im sorry but if you are using Chrome as a “pro” nowadays, its your own fault. There are countless alternatives available, starting from Firefox, to Brave, to some exotic browsers, and if you must use Chrome, then there is a de-Googled one called Chromium. Its clear that Google is milking every single one of its users using their browser, since they have access to your computers. Probably this is the “vector” they use…

> there is a de-Googled one called Chromium There's Chromium and there's Ungoogled Chromium[1]. If you're looking for (some) independence from Google, you want the latter. Or just avoid it altogether and use other browsers. I wouldn't recommend Blink-based browsers (Brave, Vivaldi, Opera, etc.) You're still indirectly giving Google power over the web by using their engine. [1] https://github.com/ungoogled-software/un…

IMO the browser is far too important to use third-party builds containing patches that don't receive serious audit.

For example, the Chromium packages provided by the vast majority of Linux distros disable security features like CFI (check your favorite distro's x86_64 Chromium package build log and look for the "is_cfi" argument). I think Arch is the only exception.

ungoogled-chromium has similar problems https://qua3k.github.io/ungoogled/

If you are going to use a Blink-based browser, I would recommend just using the official Google release, or maybe Edge or Brave if you trust the organizations behind them. Otherwise, just switch to Firefox. It has its own problems, like being overall less hardened than Chromium, but it's far less user-hostile. And regarding security, for browsing untrusted sites, I think you should always virtualize the browser since they're all routinely exploited anyway.

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#136

Post by bigjay517 »

The comments I am reading here seem to imply that this is more privacy invasive than tracking cookies. Steve Gibson did an analysis on Topics and his conclusion was that this is an approach to provide targeted ads (which websites need to make money) without being invasive.

Here is a link to his podcast where he explains the specification: https://twit.tv/shows/security-now/episodes/935?autostart=fa...

Although if you believe that being online you should be 100% anonymous and share 0% of personal data then of course Topics is not good (but then no other ad targeting solution will be either).

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#138

Post by Alifatisk »

talonx wrote: post #14
jtriangle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could... use any other chromium based browser that doesn't do this. Might I suggest Vivaldi? It's nice, lots of built in features that you probably are running extensions for currently.

Or, stick to Firefox. In the long run I want a browser that has a solid community or base behind it, with a mostly-good record (no point chasing perfection here) of privacy and security. The Mozilla Foundation has done a good but not stellar job (remember 1.1.1.1?). I also don't want to change browsers because someday Vivaldi - hypothetically - gets acquired by Evil Corp, or has some vulnerability that remains unpatc…

What’s wrong with 1.1.1.1?

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#139

Post by brandensilva »

Liquix wrote: post #18
jtriangle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could... use any other chromium based browser that doesn't do this. Might I suggest Vivaldi? It's nice, lots of built in features that you probably are running extensions for currently.

Why use chromium based browsers at all? Google largely has control of the project and they seem determined to keep adding anti-privacy/anti-user features.

I feel moving away from Google Chrome still sends a message but yes long term I think we will need to move away from Chromium given Google is running it into the ground. My hope is that Chromium will get forked and supported by other companies and individuals with ethics around a free and open web that doesn't involve Google Adware.

Re: Google Chrome pushes browser history-based ad targeting

#140

Post by pjmlp »

izacus wrote: post #116
pjmlp wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No and it doesn't matter. Electron is for lazy developers that cannot master Web widgets available for 30 years on mainstream OSes. Or step out of their comfort zone into pure native applications, or background services making use of default browser for UI. If people like myself have been able to master multiple native since decades, and also use such approaches during the dotcom boom, it is hardly an excuse for youn…

I don't understand your first sentence - the if "Electron is for lazy developers", then you absolutely want Firefox to implement PWA support so webapps don't need it anymore?

I clearly explained that PWAs are not the solution on the following paragraphs.

In fact, they are a way to turn the Web into ChromeOS, mostly pushed by Google and Microsoft, as evolution from WinJS in Windows 8, and ChromeOS API.

Post reply on HN