It is what it is
Submitted 1 day ago by weird@sub.wetshaving.social to [deleted]
https://sub.wetshaving.social/pictrs/image/96ada1dd-91f1-4cc1-8b34-dcdfd93aaa2f.webp
Comments
JaffnaCakes@lemmy.world 1 day ago
samus12345@sh.itjust.works 22 hours ago
“He’s the one who knocks!”
altphoto@lemmy.today 18 hours ago
Lucky_777@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Incognito mode was always just to hide your local browser history. Think Google would NOT track you?
Do you have Google maps? They know where you are at all times.
OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 38 minutes ago
Do you have a phone? They know where your toilet is
veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world 25 minutes ago
The know when I’m in a theatre and automatically mute my phone. Admittedly convenient, but also super creepy
camelbeard@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
User visits Google (logged in)
User visits Google, without cookies, but from the same IP, same user agent, same resolution, same OS, same enabled plugins, same browser version number, same fingerprint (based on al the previous information).
Google, who could this possibly be???
NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
You mean…they know I typed “boobs” into the search bar that one time!? NOOOO!!
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 6 hours ago
Do you have
Google maps?ANY UNMODIFIED GOOGLE CODE OR ANDROID IN THE HISTORY OF FOREVER?Then they know where you are at all times. I bet the Pixel users get gold stars.
OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 34 minutes ago
Oh no! Anyway
SonOfAntenora@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Incognito was never about privacy. It’s about hiding your seach history from your parents or partner or whatever
pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 15 hours ago
For buying gifts, for example.
Cold_Brew_Enema@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Or masturbating to pornography
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 14 hours ago
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.”
seralth@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
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.
frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 3 hours ago
Glad I don’t use Chrome lol
Shardikprime@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
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
MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 13 minutes ago
I need to check into this, but maybe someone knows.
I assumed that if you’re using incognito and you don’t sign into your Google account, the activity wouldn’t be tied to your Google account. It might be recorded and sent to Google, but anonymously, unless you signed into Google/Gmail/YouTube/whatever, while incognito.
The obvious is that your activity wouldn’t end up on your Internet history in your non-incognito Chrome.
Gonzako@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
This was silently changed it used not to have the disclaimer sentence
Shardikprime@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Silently? It’s been available for developers since January 2024. Major antivirus and security websites reported on it since then, to count:
malwarebytes.com/…/google-changes-wording-for-inc…
adguard.com/…/incognito-mode-disclaimer-change.ht….
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
engadget.com/google-says-it-will-destroy-browsing…
So I wouldn’t get why freak out like after a year?
turmacar@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Incognito mode (Chrome) and Private mode (Safari/Firefox) and InPrivate Browsing (Edge/IE) have had disclaimers/explanations for years, Chrome just expanded the disclaimer after settling the suit. Unfortunately for them the judge didn’t know how the internet works any better than the plaintiffs. Winding back the odometer on a car doesn’t mean toll roads don’t know you drove there, it just means “you” have no record of it.
Opera / Vivaldi offer an integrated VPN, but they’re about the only ones other than stuff like the Tor Browser.
tatterdemalion@programming.dev 14 hours ago
You guys are still using Chrome?
BroBot9000@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I don’t believe for a second that they are actually going to delete any data they stole from users.
Gork@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
Oops offshore backup mysteriously occurred.
state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de 3 hours ago
UPDATE disgustingly_detailed_data SET deleted = true WHERE inkognito = true;Godnroc@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
Of course they will! First you make a copy, then you delete the copy. Contractual terms satisfied.
monogram@feddit.nl 16 hours ago
The raw data might be purged but no one talks about the ML modal that google trained with that data.
seralth@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
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.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 12 hours ago
wtf was anyone expecting
Landless2029@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Incognito was literally only good for opening a second session without you logged in. It did zero for privacy. Even their disclaimer said so.
DerArzt@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Incognito, you mean porn mode?
Landless2029@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Its a moor point once you sign into your Facebook account to “share with friends”
spiffpitt@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
firefox containers are amazing for this
Landless2029@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
Firefox -p “Spanky”
zombaya01@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
Except it only keeps cookies separated, history is shared over all containers.
Bieren@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
It’s Google. If you are shocked by this, you deserve to be tracked.
Zacryon@feddit.org 7 hours ago
That’s called victim blaming.
But yeah. I really hope people stop using Google products. Google is evil.
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 6 hours ago
That’s called victim blaming.
Be an informed consumer or a sorry one. It’s anyone’s choice.
seralth@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
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.
the_q@lemmy.zip 8 hours ago
Putting the burden on users is a very Google thing to do, my dude.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
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.
Bieren@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
This is more about knowing Google is an advertising company and makes money from selling your data. Than it is knowing how the application works and what it does under the covers.
plyth@feddit.org 4 hours ago
Then don’t allow them to use those services without a license. It’s cars or chemicals all over again.
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 8 hours ago
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.
sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
If you care about your privacy, don’t use products from a company whose entire business model is built on invading your privacy.
Mongostein@lemmy.ca 23 hours ago
Incognito/Private Browsing came about when people were sharing computers more often. It doesn’t save history and cookies and whatnot on your device. It’s to prevent the next user from getting in to your bank account.
Google and whoever else will still know your IP and can use that to cross-reference whatever other data they have on you.
jim3692@discuss.online 13 hours ago
I use private, because I am a tab hoarder
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 13 hours ago
I haven’t used Chrome in years. Brave and firefox, that’s my crowd.
LordWiggle@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Brave is also Chromium.
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 6 hours ago
Correct. But it is not the same.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Firefox is also a web browser.
Oh sorry, I thought we were making meaningless comparisons.
vga@sopuli.xyz 13 hours ago
Next headline: Google promises to delete the Firefox private window data they were holding
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Firefox’s main funding was from Google being their default search engine. Which of course means anything searched in Google is recorded to the external IP address logs. So unless you are going directly to the website or changed the search engine in Firefox, yes Google was recording said information (or at least compiling the numbers for data analytics) to use for advertising purposes.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 12 hours ago
andybytes@programming.dev 11 hours ago
Librewolf
Mwa@thelemmy.club 9 hours ago
same i use Librewolf nowadays
SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 hours ago
I use chrome once or twice a year, when I need to figure out if a website problem is my browser or the site.
tfm@europe.pub 13 hours ago
Ironically, I use incognito for that.
burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
hey before they do that, can i look through their files on me? theres some porn i havent been able to refind anywhere
dumbass@quokk.au 10 hours ago
Wouldn't that be amazing! I have single frames of good videos stuck in my head that I can never find again.
Shardikprime@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
There is a r/tipofmypenis for that
Maybe someone knows a Lemmy alternative
Cattail@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
yeah im part of that class action and i get so many text asking about it
Elgenzay@lemmy.ml 21 hours ago
You’ve gone Incognito. Others who use this device won’t see your activity, so you can browse more privately. This won’t change how data is collected by websites you visit and the services they use, including Google. Downloads, bookmarks and reading list items will be saved.
- Google Chrome
stoy@lemmy.zip 18 hours ago
Incognito was never about hiding your data from Google, it was always about preventing random websites from getting your data
gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
If anyone thought that Incognito somehow protected their data from websites or services, then that’s their fault for jumping to that conclusion in the face of everything saying that’s not the case.
Also…
In lawsuits settlement
In meme sentence, words disappear.
Mynameisallen@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
Um was this surprising to anyone? I think we all assumed that this was the case no???
bitjunkie@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Things do the opposite of what their name says they do. We’ve been in 1984/F451 bizarro world for a while, now.
Meltdown@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
I don’t think anyone thought that “incognito mode” his anything from anyone except the other users of that particular computer
altphoto@lemmy.today 18 hours ago
Go to the website directly! Porn hub is not hard to spell! I spell it all the time even using no fingers at all!
vga@sopuli.xyz 13 hours ago
They are fully capable of extracting profile data from you even if you’re in incognito/private mode. And it doesn’t matter what browser you are using.
NotAGamer@lemmy.org 1 day ago
Am I the only one who only used incognito by accident when intending to select “open in new tab” from the context menu?
Zenith@lemm.ee 22 hours ago
But they still won’t they’ll just make a more hidden copy
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
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.
OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 39 minutes ago
Good for testing instead of “clearing cache and cookies”
beejboytyson@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Some ones been caught with his pants down 😏