NotHereToPlayGames Posted April 7 Posted April 7 4 hours ago, D.Draker said: https://www.theregister.com/2020/02/05/google_chrome_id_numbers/ A very worthwhile read. I just have to wonder just how many folks will actually read it (we live in a Twitter/X/Whatever society with an attention span of only ONE sentence at a time) [Even members of MSFN will "complain" if a reply is more than three sentences]! I think I counted 28 paragraphs (give or take). And to me, you have to get all the way to paragraph 19 (67.9% into what I suspect most will classify as "TL;DR"). The Cliff Note version - 1) Google claims the goal is to reduce fingerprinting for the browser itself (Chrome, in this case) 2) MARKETERS are against the goal - MARKETING AGENCIES want fingerprinting to INCREASE (societal norm, you can never take away free cheese after your constituants are accustomed to receiving free cheese) 3) Google isn't just a "browser", they are ALSO a MARKETING AGENCY! (Google owns DoubleClick) 4) Google is clerverly playing both sides at the same time! DECREASING overall fingerprinting but at the same time allowing a BROWSER-SESSION that visits YouTube, Gmail, Fitbit, Waze, DoubleClick in that same session has the "data" from each other! 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now