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

71–80 of 127 posts

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#71

Post by TheGoddessInari »

shevy-java wrote: post #61
liquid_thyme wrote: post #41

Chrome may be an excellent browser, but the venn diagram overlap with malware keeps getting larger.

Is it excellent? It feels more to me that the competition does not really exist - or just sucks. And then people largely gave up, letting the adMoney take over everything. I abandoned firefox when a mozilla dev claimed Linux users can only listen to audio via systemd+pulseaudio (unless you recompile firefox but who in his sane mind wants to use mozconfig in 2026 - https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/xsoft/…

Pipewire just works without needing the awfulness of pulseaudio, but there's also "apulse" to shim directly to alsa if you want more like the older behavior. But Pipewire is far more compatible and modern.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#72

Post by NewsaHackO »

shevy-java wrote: post #61
liquid_thyme wrote: post #41

Chrome may be an excellent browser, but the venn diagram overlap with malware keeps getting larger.

Is it excellent? It feels more to me that the competition does not really exist - or just sucks. And then people largely gave up, letting the adMoney take over everything. I abandoned firefox when a mozilla dev claimed Linux users can only listen to audio via systemd+pulseaudio (unless you recompile firefox but who in his sane mind wants to use mozconfig in 2026 - https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/xsoft/…

What sane person use non systemd Linux? I kid, of course and thank you for your service in keeping the linux ecosystem honest in terms of reducing systemd’s hegemony and everything but this cannot be a problem you are not used to running into.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#73

Post by nosioptar »

bergheim wrote: post #39

I hate $THING Firefox does, and I'll complain about it, and I will use $CHROMIUM browser and not complain about that for some reason!

I complain about Firefox out of hope that the people at Mozilla will pull their heads out of their asses. I dont bother complaining about chrome because I generally do not use it and I certainly don't expect anyone at google to care at all about their users, decency, etc.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#74

Post by saint_yossarian »

alance wrote: post #67
thinker34 wrote: post #5

>> I’m personally inclined to cite Hanlon’s razor here rather than engage in conspiracy theories. That is a likely case. Chrome is their closed source software unlike the Chromium browser.

Does the same behaviour manifest in Chromium?

I can reproduce it with Chromium 152.0.7977.75 on Debian sid.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#75

Post by lapcat »

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...

Huh? I can't make sense of this criticism. What "faith" do you need?

Every screenshot in the blog post is the same size, which made it easier to do the tags. (I write my blog in raw HTML.) Also, the first screenshot shows that my start page in Chrome is not Google Search, which is in fact quite relevant to the content of the blog post.

For the same reason, I showed a screenshot of Chrome sign-in disabled. Nonetheless, another commenter (who doesn't even use Chrome!) claimed that Chrome sign-in was the cause: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49582989 To be honest, these comments depress me.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#76

Post by saghm »

isncjwjxjwnd wrote: post #21
edoceo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

And who do you think makes these behavioural decisions? There is no “corporation”, there are, however, those currently on that company’s payroll. It’s their fault. The people. The humans. The ones working there. The ones knowingly employing their knowledge in service of the company. It’s always the humans.

If the structure doesn't have any influence at all on the behavior, why do we have regulations against monopolies (at least on paper)?

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#77

Post by arbol »

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.

It's to protect against scrapers that aren't running JavaScript. Makes it more costly for them.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#78

Post by makeitdouble »

rbtms wrote: post #69

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I suppose this allows google to better persist browser identifiers in order to facilitate advertising? I'm not surprised they do this since advertising represents almost 3/4 of Google 's revenue. If anything, why should anyone expect something else? Company in the ads business modifies monopolistic browser to make money with ads and more news at 11. If it's not this, it's going to…

Being surprised or not, and being pissed about it or not are orthogonal.

I'm also not surprised and do fault Google for it. We shouldn't give them a pass just because they're regular offenders, it should be the opposite IMHO.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#80

Post by pessimizer »

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).

> In both cases the judges found Google in violation of antitrust law

Exactly. They have been determined to be a monopoly, but have been allowed to continue to be a monopoly because not being a monopoly could damage their business.

Why wouldn't they do anything that they felt like doing if they had been assured immunity to any government intervention. Every company in the country, tech or not, heard this loud and clear. Thanks, Obama. Thanks, Clinton.

Post reply on HN