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

81–90 of 127 posts

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#81

Post by pessimizer »

eesmith wrote: post #53
pavon wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 advert…

[flagged]

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#82

Post by ketralnis »

pampas wrote: post #31
fedpost wrote: post #2

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

No politicians are going to fight a media company. They're in the PR and advertising supply chain.

This administration has spent quite a lot of time going after media companies.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#83

Post by freeAgent »

mgiampapa wrote: post #6

I feel like the obvious thing to check here is that all chrome processes have terminated between tests. If it's still running some zombie process of course the data would persist.

Why would that cause only Google’s info to be preserved across sessions, though? Somewhere, Google are privileging their own data and preventing it from being deleted when other data are deleted and the browser is configured so everything should be gone.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#84

Post by jtmarl1n »

manlymuppet wrote: post #30
8note wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iirc lina khan was appointed during the first trump admin and got most of her work done suing to split google during the biden admin? you are a bit out of the loop if you think this is a partisan issue, or specifically one thats only there when trump is in charge

Allow me to be anal for a moment, but what is the point of doing “if I remember correctly” for something like this? You can very easily look up exactly when Lina Khan was appointed and get answer very quickly. Is it not worth the effort checking these things before commenting? Ok rant over. Sorry to be an asshole. This is not your fault as much a standard which should be changed.

I’m 100% with you on the spirit of this comment. I don’t understand it either. I fear the standard you mentioned has been set at far too low of a level.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#85

Post by rf15 »

procaryote wrote: post #48

Just another reason to stop using chrome and it's related browsers. If you don't want to hand the biggest ad company a monopoly over web-browsing, start using a gecko based browser like librewolf, zen, mullvad or firefox.

Also support Ladybird. It's not generally usable just yet, but the strides its taking forward are immense.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#88

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

fedpost wrote: post #2

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

This admin said they are:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-wins-signi...

> Google used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#89

Post by eesmith »

pessimizer wrote: post #81
eesmith wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 advert…

[flagged]

My point is that your claim 'This administration has done nothing to end or undermine the antitrust cases against Google.' is incorrect if you also include European antitrust cases.

Yes, the last 50 years of post-Borkianism has resulted in an entire judicial system having a very narrow and essentially useless definition of anti-trust, far different from its original goals. That's part of the broader neo-liberal movement which started around the time of Carter, gained strength with Reagan, continued with Clinton's "triangulation" and NAFTA, and is still with us.

Yes, the League of Women Voters warned us about what you term the "two private clubs" back in 1988 when they decided to stop hosting the United States presidential debates saying that following the demands of the two parties would "perpetrate a fraud on the American voter".

Yet you seem to think I'm somehow shocked that same aged corporate Democrats who supported Obama, and who now fight tooth and nail against the democratic socialist arm of their party, are somehow in actually in favor of effective antitrust enforcement?

Your rant makes it seem like you're just easily triggered by the least bit of correction.

> I want to see a third Trump term.

Ahh, you're one of those anti-Constitution people. I remember as a kid people calling out "four more years" in support of a 3rd Reagan term, as their hero worship made them forget the lesson of FDR and the Twenty-second Amendment.

Just like those people who forget the lesson of Guiteau about a consequence of whims and bribes as a way to run a government.

Re: Chrome again exempts Google from user site data settings

#90

Post by redeeman »

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/…

how does it need systemd? also, you could continue using alsa using the wrapper, or you could use pipewire
Post reply on HN