You guys are still using Chrome?
Incognito was never about privacy. It’s about hiding your seach history from your parents or partner or whatever
and i’m pretty sure the browsers have been quite explicit about this for a long time now, but of course no one bothers to read “This won’t change how data is collected by websites you visit and the services they use, including Google.”
It’s as far as I remember literally always said it’s basically just turning off local history, and not for true privacy. The wording has changed over the years and frankly only become more explicated and clear about that fact.
This is a rare case of google NOT being the problem here. People are misusing a tool that has always been honest about itself.
Google wasn’t really explicit about that until the lawsuit.
For buying gifts, for example.
Or masturbating to pornography
Or buying pornography.
Or pornographic gifts.
“Ma’am, I heard it’s your birthday, so I brought this giant package…”
That’s adorable.
“He’s the one who knocks!”
I don’t believe for a second that they are actually going to delete any data they stole from users.
Oops offshore backup mysteriously occurred.
Of course they will! First you make a copy, then you delete the copy. Contractual terms satisfied.
The raw data might be purged but no one talks about the ML modal that google trained with that data.
UPDATE disgustingly_detailed_data SET deleted = true WHERE inkognito = true;To be fair nothing was stolen, the lawyers even admitted as much.
This is a user error problem caused by the moron in a hurry problem.
The warning on incognito mode both before and after the change was very explicit that it was local only. It was intended for people sharing a computer, not for privacy to anything you searched, external websites, etc
Below the warning even had examples over exactly what was and was not saved with it explicitly saying that external websites would be able to track and save your data including Google.
The change was to add that warning list to the initial warning itself because Google had assumed people would read the entire page. They did not.
Which means that those morons in a hurry who only skimmed misunderstood what incognito mode was for. Did not read the use case, the warning, the TOs, the manual, or any other information provided both explicitly or implicitly.
Hell even parted the argument of the lawyers was that this is a user issue and that Google had a responsibility to prevent people who were ignorant or in a hurry from misunderstanding. And while they made a good faith effort, it could have been better. Google being the large company is taking the fall for this more than anything but it is at the end of the day a user issue.
Um was this surprising to anyone? I think we all assumed that this was the case no???
Doesn’t it specifically say on a new incognito tab that this doesn’t protect against sites or service providers from gathering information…and only stops you from storing local information (history, cookies, etc)? Do people actually think that incognito is adding privacy protection?
It has somewhat of a privacy protection because it’s incapable of keeping cookies. The bar is in hell, but it passed it.
That was actually a result of this issue, where Google placed misleading statements in incognito and then proceeded to actively go around them.
I think the techno illiterate boomers of the fediverse are probably flabbergasted
The Google Incognito tab in any browser clarifies that while it prevents your browsing history from being saved on your device, it does not make your browsing completely private.
Websites you visit, your employer (if on a work network), and your internet service provider (ISP) can still track your online activity.
Hell it even has a link that leads directly to the privacy policy
https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/9845881?hl=en-GB
The only thing that shocks me is that no one ever reads it
This was silently changed it used not to have the disclaimer sentence
Silently? It’s been available for developers since January 2024. Major antivirus and security websites reported on it since then, to count:
https://adguard.com/en/blog/incognito-mode-disclaimer-change.html.
It’s been widely reported at least since March 2024. It’s been well over a year since that
Hell even this meme is outdated, as the settlement is widely known since April 2024
So I wouldn’t get why freak out like after a year?
Incognito was literally only good for opening a second session without you logged in. It did zero for privacy. Even their disclaimer said so.
Incognito, you mean porn mode?
Its a moor point once you sign into your Facebook account to “share with friends”
firefox containers are amazing for this
Firefox -p “Spanky”
Am I the only one who only used incognito by accident when intending to select “open in new tab” from the context menu?
I use it to access the same site with different logins at the same time, or to let someone else log in to a service temporarily using my device
If this is something you do often, you might consider Firefox with the multi-account containers extension: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/containers
It allows unique/isolated profiles on a per-tab basis.
I’ve found it great for work, for the many things that require me to be logged into both the me@example.com and me@example.onmicrosoft.com accounts simultanously, to manage MS 365 things. But restricting social media to an isolated profile, multiple Google/Microsoft/whatever accounts, these are all possible.
That’s literally the only time I’ve ever used it. Knowing what it is, I don’t even need it. I have the settings set to erase all my history and most other stuff upon closing the browser. Which is exactly what incognito mode does, but temporarily for a single tab session.
It’s great for testing a site when you’re not sure whether the issue is because you’re logged in or there’s some cached data.
Things do the opposite of what their name says they do. We’ve been in 1984/F451 bizarro world for a while, now.
It’s Google. If you are shocked by this, you deserve to be tracked.
That’s simply not true. People can’t be expected to know what’s going on under the hood of services designed specifically to simplify things for non-technical users and conceal what’s under the hood.
Then don’t allow them to use those services without a license. It’s cars or chemicals all over again.
Are people required to know how their car works?
Do people have to understand chemistry to buy gasoline or mercury thermometers?
That’s called victim blaming.
But yeah. I really hope people stop using Google products. Google is evil.
To be fair it is in this case the victims is more at fault then not for misusing, misunderstanding and not reading the terms of service or explicate use case.
Like this would be like getting mad at your doctor for keeping notes over you and sharing them with other doctors. But not your random friends or strangers.
Incognito mode has said it’s always been local privacy only not that it doesn’t track or record you, nor prevents others from doing so.
It’s just turning off history basically.
That’s called victim blaming.
Be an informed consumer or a sorry one. It’s anyone’s choice.
Putting the burden on users is a very Google thing to do, my dude.
No, not really. There are low bars; this isn’t one of them. This is not something I expect average people who aren’t into technology to anticipate. Nerds like me, yeah. But not the public. Though we’re getting to that point.
If you care about your privacy, don’t use products from a company whose entire business model is built on invading your privacy.
Naming it incognito was a mistake. It was always clear to me all incognito is, is a non persistent container to keep your browsing data separate from your regular browsing data. All its hiding is your porn browsing habits from your mom. But of course, the name implies much more.
Good for testing instead of “clearing cache and cookies”
There were memes about this what feels like at least 10 years ago. Makes perfect sense when you think about it.
Not a mistake, intentionally deceptive
Some ones been caught with his pants down 😏
from your mom
…did your parents not have friends set up packet sniffers?
“Hey, so now that Chrome has been released, we’re gonna fly up to visit your son and install a packet sniffer on his network!”
Your parents seriously didnt do that, though?
I’m just gently teasing you because I was 29 years old when Chrome came out. My parents would never have even thought to ask someone to install something like that when the internet first came out.
yeah im part of that class action and i get so many text asking about it
Glad I don’t use Chrome lol
wtf was anyone expecting
