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

Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

lapcatsoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 127 posts

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#51

Post by netsharc »

lapcat wrote: post #34
Zarathustra30 wrote: post #28

While I absolutely believe this, the author should include a control. Go to a different website that sets data, and show that it is deleted when Google data is not.

I did: "As far as I can tell, www.google.com is the only site exempted by Chrome." My screenshots do not show this, but my screenshots were not intended as proof, merely as explanation. Chrome is available to everyone and used by millions of people, so anyone who wants proof can reproduce the issue themselves, and I hope that they do.

The fact that the first screenshot is a totally empty browser window (just to show the address bar) made me lose faith about reading the rest of your writing...

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#52

Post by TeMPOraL »

anticensor wrote: post #32
edoceo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations are not, they're made of humans but they behave worse than an individual.

Corporations are just groups of people working under a common name towards a common goal, even when that goal is flimsy or bad.

> Corporations are just groups of people working under a common name towards a common goal

Exactly in the same way as humans are just groups of cells working under a common genetic identity towards a common goal.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#53

Post by eesmith »

pavon wrote: post #17
fedpost wrote: post #2

It's okay, they're not a monopoly according to this administration. Nothing to see here, carry on!

This administration has done nothing to end or undermine the antitrust cases against Google. In both cases the judges found Google in violation of antitrust law, but both handed down fairly mild remedies, despite the administration (prosecutor) pushing for much stronger changes. The judges were appointed by Clinton (Leonie Brinkema) and Obama (Amit Mehta).

Perhaps not US cases, but those aren't the only antitrust cases against Google.

What about Trump's threats after Google was hit with a 2.95 billion Euro fine from the European Commission's antitrust investigation?

From last year: "EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič on Monday made an 11th-hour intervention to stop the European Commission from issuing a penalty against American tech giant Google for its search advertising practices, amid continued trade threats from U.S. President Donald Trump." https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-google-antitrust-decision...

Or from https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/10/google-meta-big-tech-6-billi... "In February, Trump signed a memorandum stating the U.S. would consider tariffs to “combat digital service taxes (DSTs), fines, practices, and policies that foreign governments levy on American companies.”"

That memorandum is at https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-pr...

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#54

Post by nubinetwork »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #38
cute_boi wrote: post #18

> all Google Search results are now opaque https://www.google.com/goto?url= garbage rather than the site URLs! Can google justify why are they doing this? I wish google will die sooner if they start behaving like this.

Remember AMP? Baby steps and they’ll try again.

Google still uses amp on websites with a lot of ads... go figure that the king of ads dislikes some ads.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#56

Post by Geezus_42 »

asdf88990 wrote: post #4
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and the rest of the billionaire class thank you for ensuring everyone is too divided by red/blue tribalism to ever have enough unity to mount a fight against them. Well done!

Exactly. It is like Google has only emerged during this administration with their shenanigans.

What rock have you been living under?

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#57

Post by jrflowers »

netsharc wrote: post #51
lapcat wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did: "As far as I can tell, www.google.com is the only site exempted by Chrome." My screenshots do not show this, but my screenshots were not intended as proof, merely as explanation. Chrome is available to everyone and used by millions of people, so anyone who wants proof can reproduce the issue themselves, and I hope that they do.

The fact that the first screenshot is a totally empty browser window (just to show the address bar) made me lose faith about reading the rest of your writing...

Looks like a lot of the other folks here read the post

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#58

Post by patates »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #3
fedpost wrote: post #2

It's okay, they're not a monopoly according to this administration. Nothing to see here, carry on!

Google and the rest of the billionaire class thank you for ensuring everyone is too divided by red/blue tribalism to ever have enough unity to mount a fight against them. Well done!

So we cannot say anything bad about the current administration without being divisive? What does criticising them tell you about tribalism?

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#59

Post by Geezus_42 »

tehlike wrote: post #25
cute_boi wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politicians are also humans, everyone working for De Beers are also human... Please stop justifying egregious behavior from company who is destroying the fabric of internet with too many useless ads....And it isn't first time they are doing it, these "engineers" were the one who removed mv2 without better ad blocks in mv3.

1. ads are not useless. 2. without ads, there would be significantly less free content for people to read. 3. politicians are human too, but not the best of us except a few. Yes. It's hip to say ads make things worse, but reality is often much more nuanced. My original point being, many times an external person may think something is intentional when it may very well be a bug or may be there for a good reason. I have…

Can't remember the last time I saw an ad for something I was actually interested in. These days I am often discouraged from buying a product based on ads.
Post reply on HN