211–220 of 519 posts
Knowing who he is, my takeaway should be, "Wow! An Internet Hall of Famer weighing in against a Google product!" But my actual takeaway is, "Legends of the CS world write informal, pithy rants to Google just like the rest of us mortals."
Now, they require that it be managed with the google Home app, and have discontinued the method that allowed chromecast use without installing additional google software on your phone.
This made for a really disheartening christmas experience, when I first assured my mother that no, we could skip this stuff with your phone, only to find out that no, she would indeed have to make that sacrifice.
Especially frustrating is that my same devices, validated with the old method, continue to function just fine.
Does anyone with more knowledge than I have know of a reason for this that isn't data-greedy or consumer-hostile? From my perspective, "Don't be evil" has been dead long enough that the bones are sunbleached.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't bother me because it's a Chromecast, an appliance I don't want or need. If I needed something similar, I could get it from other manufacturers.
First they came for the appliances I don't want or need, because I don't use appliances I don't want or need. This has been discussed to death. Slippery slope, etc., etc.
This should bother people here more than it does. The last thing the Internet needs is even more dependence upon Google. They've made it quite clear through their actions that they're not supporters of a free and open Internet: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/14/google-china-prototype-l... If people don't push back against these kinds of things, Google will continue to abuse their power. There shouldn't be an army o…
It doesn't bother me because it's a Chromecast, an appliance I don't want or need. If I needed something similar, I could get it from other manufacturers.
Granted, in this case if you block Google's DNS servers from routing, Chrome will use your system's name resolution configuration.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If Google used Google DNS to spy on people Are you seriously thinking they don't store/analyse/use that kind of information??? (That's every site you visit, at minimum.)
Yes. They don't. They guarantee they don't. The spooky answer is they don't need it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First they came for the appliances I don't want or need, because I don't use appliances I don't want or need. This has been discussed to death. Slippery slope, etc., etc.
I disagree. People who care about not hitting 8.8.8.8 simply do not own a Chromecast.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not arguing with that, but lots of us can and do run our own DNS for various reasons, it should respect that, or provide a power-user way to override the default DNS. By all means offer fall-backs to Google DNS if it's not behaving correctly, for the reason you mention. I've found it's also, quite poorly implemented, particular on CC Audios, I had an instance last year where my internet connection went down at my…
DNAT
More concerning to me was the fairly recent removal of non-phone-app setup. It used to be that a chromecast would display a 4 character code on screen, which could be used to activate it from the browser. Now, they require that it be managed with the google Home app, and have discontinued the method that allowed chromecast use without installing additional google software on your phone. This made for a really dishear…
Phone app can use a custom TLS CA to make sure the stick was produced by Google and is not a rogue neighbor phishing for your WiFi password..