Does this mean that Chrome will be directly supporting anti-adblock technology? Will it somehow just disable extensions like ublock on these CBA supported sites?
> publisher's adblock wall
The change here is that Chrome will now notice when a publisher has served a user a "please disable your adblock for this site to continue" wall (maybe Google will suggest such pages be sent as HTTP 402 responses?) and do something on the browser-chrome level to give users the additional option: using a Google payments system built into Chrome to send the publisher a one-time [micro?]payment in exchange for unlocking that one article, without having to disable their adblocker.
(Of course, many ad-supported publishers also already have ad-free subscriptions that you could sign up for—but they don't tend to bother with one-off per-article micropayments, because going through the whole giving-out-your-credit-card-to-a-web-form flow isn't worth it to read one article. This would avoid that problem.)
Funny coincidence: I pitched this exact thing in the form of a browser extension to a VC firm a few years ago.
I think it shouldn't be surprising that Google acts like this. It seemed likely from the start that their ad blocking effort is mostly an attempt to preserve the ad industry and eliminate third party ad blocking not under Google's control.
Those cheap android phones and lower-end Windows laptops are so cheap because they are subsidized from the revenue they bring in via data collection and selling.
Its like a privacy 101 realization...
Not true. Lets see what those "cheap" devices provide in terms of privacy:
1. During installation Windows 10 explicitly asks you what stuff you want to enable and how those affect your privacy
2. Microsoft Edge supports ad blockers and anti-trackers on desktop, mobile version is coming (already here in fast-ring?)
3. Google allows you to turn off all kind of analytics. They email you once a year and ask you to check your security and privacy settings.
4. Chrome allows you to install ad-blockers from Googles own extension store
5. On Android you also have the choice of installing Mozilla firefox which supports desktop-grade adblocker and anti-tracker extensions. Android being android you can make it the default OS browser and disable or remove Chrome completely.
6. On Android you can also install Mozilla Focus which is a privacy-oriented browser
You are basically spreading FUD.
Where does Windows explicitly ask for permission to spy on your every keystroke and send massive quantities of analytics data back to the mothership?
And, since they're explicitly asking, how can I explicitly turn all that spyware off?
Oh, that's right, I can't. Because your assertion is flat out wrong, if not an actual deliberate prevarication.
How is this even being discussed any more? Haven't we seen enough articles about Microsoft's impossible to disable spyware? Windows 10 is spyware first, and an operating system second.
Yes, there's plenty of "diagnostic" information sent to Microsoft. You might be willing to trust Microsoft with it, but I sure don't.
Just like they claim the keylogger isn't really that, it's perfectly harmless. Here's an early quote from Microsoft: “When you interact with your Windows device by speaking, writing (handwriting), or typing, Microsoft collects speech, inking, and typing information—including information about your Calendar and People (also known as contacts)…” http://www.pcworld.com/article/2974057/windows/how-to-turn-o...
Is that still current? I don't know, why would I trust them to have removed it?
Microsoft's game is to wear people down. Not everything can be turned off; many things that can be turned off are turned back on by system updates. After a while most people give up and live with the spyware.
I have not seen any actual analysis of the sent data. I would prefer it didn't send anything but until proven otherwise I will assume it is just app diagnostics.
Remember they are in the business of selling operating systems. EU would happily shut them down if they are caught doing any shenanigans.
> Thankfully the only Windows I currently run is XP in a VM isolated from the Internet
I suspect whatever OS you are using as host also talks to the mothership, it just doesn't say it in a privacy page.
MacOS has telemetry, but it seems to be easily disabled. Is it really disabled? Nobody but Apple knows.
It's safe to say that both Windows and MacOS are chatty. But, for whatever reason, I trust Apple more.
My firewall runs OpenBSD. That's a breath of fresh air. I can run ps and understand exactly what processes are running and why. Definitely no inexplicable TCP connections.
Companies aren't laws. Everything can suddenly change.
"many" is a link to https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/02/why-people-use-ad-b...
Except that page shows that "to avoid being tracked" is actually relatively low on the list of reasons people use ad blockers compared to the annoying advertising issues, malware, etc?
All of the reasons listed in that survey are just aspects of a single overarching reason to block ads, which is that ads universally degrade your experience of the internet.
But yeah, Mozilla follows Google in this regard and it's in Mozilla's best interest to preserve tracking and allow advertising industry to "hijack our attention", otherwise they won't get enough funding to exist.
They must start paying users. Only then, will their ads be viewed.
In the last year, due to Apple's reasonably good support for privacy, I have gone all-in for iOS and macOS devices. I didn't make this decision lightly, but for me it seemed like the right thing to do.
I favor using Google services that I pay for (GCP, Play Music and Movies) but I am concerned about tracking activities of Google and Facebook.
I think Apple deserves support for respecting customer privacy.
Chrome is useful because it's so extendable.
The reason developers aren't all that interested is because these extensions are Mac only not because Apple isn't interested in having them.