But it still applies until at least 31 December.
Which implies that whatever Google is doing now, it's not contrary to GDPR or any other EU rules at all.
Mozilla's head of EU public policy, Raegan MacDonald, reckons effective regulation to protect privacy and enable fair competition is an "issue of survival" for Mozilla and other independent companies. The browser developer approached us in order to comment on the EU's newly announced digital strategy. "We're at the beginning …
That’s only part of the story though...
“...Ireland where Google and other US tech companies have their European headquarters, is staying in the EU...It is understood that Google decided to move its British users out of Irish jurisdiction because it is unclear whether Britain will follow GDPR or adopt other rules that could affect the handling of user data...”
So it’s more about Brexit legal uncertainty than what you suggested.
And yet somehow Google thinks they can shift the data to the US. Now which data controller in the US would you need to speak to to assert your GDPR rights? And would they take any notice of you? And if they don't, which independent data protection public body would you speak to to get them enforced (do they even exist in the US)?
You would speak to the exact same person you spoke to to assert your rights if the data were stored in France or on the moon. The UK ICO. The Data Protection Act was always stronger than the requirements mandated by the EU; at present GDPR is written into UK law and continues to apply after Brexit - of course any 'punishment' handed down would be wholly inadequate but that can be assumed as it has been historically nothing to do with Brexit.
>Google could also have had British accounts answer to a British subsidiary, but has opted not to do so
British people could also generally not to use google, but have opted not to do so.
With the prevalence of big tech, privacy is non-trivial to keep, but you can do some basic things, like use a paid-for email service, use Brave or no-script. I really value privacy, but even just blocking the ads makes the internet a more pleasant place.
"Mozilla is not a company that owns an ecosystem; we do not own hardware; we cannot promote or create ourselves as the default in mobile, in iOS, in Android, or on a laptop or desktop." ..... Mozilla head of EU public policy Raegan MacDonald
Of course we can, Ms MacDonald, by the simple adage of prime drivering information for browsers in all systems to access for Advanced IntelAIgent Programming.
A little something extra especial to energise and exercise that great matter between the ears.
And that's enough to keep anyone busy for more than just ever.
well, probably really yes! - and does one need to add in one's post that the target is already half set with the question of Ms MacDonald, but would that require some brand new method of crypting/decrypting wbstf right on-the-go, appearing right out-of-the-blue?
aIright, nobody getting jealous, blue's just an example (-;
And that's what the establishment are terrified of for then have they lost command and control of the leading narratives ..... to SMARTR IntelAIgent Systems executing Almighty Beta Virtual Instructions.
I Kid U Not.
Do you realise those points in time and space are your current reality to deny if you can and want to?
I was the person who told them Firebird was already taken (by an Interbase database clone). They weren't too pleased having spent several weeks coming up with that name to replace Phoenix.
When they suggested Firefox I laughed and said "you know there's a Clint Eastwood film..."
That reminds me of when Norwich Union rebranded itself as Aviva, which they thought was a pretty unique/unused name. That is until until someone pointed out that on one of the main pedestrian areas in Norwich there was already a women's clothes shop* called Aviva...
(* it's gone now)
On quite a few of these CSS3 issues, it's that Firefox adheres to the actual CSS spec, but the spec is an ass. Chrome and several others deviate from the spec with proprietary undocumented cludges, that give behaviour that's much more intuitive, and makes FF look "broken" in contrast. Certainly this is the case with a lot of Flexbox oddness, not as certain about grid.
Worked on a site recently where I just relented that it will look different on FF and Chrome... I didn't have the energy to franken-div it.
Long time ago, the existance saved us from Proprietary MS only internet.
And I would have thought it deliciously ironic (and a much better choice for them and us) if Microsoft had based their Edge rewrite on Mozilla/Firefox rather than MSIE6-revisited (AKA Google Chrome).
I wish we had that same Firefox now. Back then, Mozilla's strategy was to unabashedly deliver a better browser than the corporate giant offered. The bit about not being part of the Microsoft hegemony was certainly part of it, but being a better browser was important too. It's doubtful people would have migrated just because of the dislike for what MS was doing to the web!
Now the same outfit that aimed to unseat IE by making a better browser is doing its level best to lop off every feature that makes Firefox better than Chrome, in some kind of foolish hope that it can somehow out-Chrome the actual Chrome. What would have happened if Mozilla of the early 2000s removed Firefox's tabbed browsing feature, removed the toolbar customization, and restricted the addon APIs so that only IE BHOs (browser helper objects) could be used instead of the much more powerful XPCOM addons? Would it have had the impact it did if it tried to compete with IE on who can have the most IE-like feature set?
Mozilla has been obsessed with trying to copy Chrome for more than a decade, and its market share has been in freefall for about the same time. I'm not suggesting causation... only that trying to out-Chrome the actual Chrome has not worked, and yet they still persist, as if there was some kind of critical mass of deleted features that will finally start the exodus away from Chrome.
Chrome's UI is the worst I have ever seen on a desktop browser, and Firefox's used to be the best, until they dumped that to be more like Chrome. It's been a gradual process of dropping important features with each release, but extension authors repeatedly stepped up and provided the means to fix these blunders. Then, of course, Mozilla chopped off the extension API capable of making such changes, in favor of the Chrome extension API (of course). If not for userChrome.css, bringing a Firefox-like UI to Firefox would be impossible... and that's a feature Chrome doesn't have, so I'm terribly suspicious that its days are numbered too.
Mozilla seems to be engaged in a decade-long suicide pact, and it shows no sign of changing direction.
"Chrome's UI is the worst I have ever seen on a desktop browser, and Firefox's used to be the best, until they dumped that to be more like Chrome."
I am glad its not just me with that problem. I dont care that other people might prefer chromes look over FF but I preferred FF over chrome. That and the version number thing where they seem to be rushing to have the highest number yet for what I am using I see nothing different.
Another damning thing that Google actively discourages use of other browses. How do I know this? The last month Google maps became unusable on Firefox but I have access to other browsers one of which Falkon was able to fool Google that it was Chrome. It promoted Google to sent out a message saying "Chrome needs to be on a new version". Nevertheless Google maps worked perfectly.
I am not a big Windows user, but IIRC, the Mosaic (via Spyglass Software, an amazingly prescient name) based Internet Explorer has been replaced by the Chromium based Edge browser. I'm pretty sure this "child of Chrome" is at least the default browser for Windows 10.
But, yeah, you _can_ run IE on Win10, much as you _can_ swim in the SF Bay in January. That said, most employers will not require you to do that (the swimming bit, not the "use IE until we can fix some crucial company sites". That's still a thing)
Microsoft still includes some support for IE (HECK IE 11 STILL GETS UPDATES!) because Enterprises for some reason still need it.
And I was referring to the late 90s early 2000s when the Wed was literally made for Internet Explorer and if you tried another Web Browser the webpages didn't work right.
ok it probably doesn't solve much, but set your browser to delete ALL cookies when you exit the browser. And exit it at least once per day, preferably more often.
It will make it a little more difficult for them to track you as you'll get a different cookie the next time you go to their site. Plus use an ad blocker to stop more cookies getting stored, which reduces the footprint of data they have on you from different sites. Then use No Script to stop unnecessary scripts from loading, often in the background. Don't think that's a problem? Then I recommend you put No Script on for a short time and just look at the number of websites that get loaded when you load a page -- try the 'free' news sites, as they seem to be the worst. Every time you go on one you will load sometimes twenty or so other sites; some are needed for the page to function, but many are just parasitic trying to get you to store cookies so they can build a picture of what you view.
As I say none of this is foolproof, but it only adds a little more effort on your side, and will break some of their scripts so they have less complete data about you.
If you think all the above is shit, then be my guest and do nowt. I may be just as exposed as you, but at least I don't see any of those annoying flashing adverts. They drive me mad. And if the website then breaks when you use these tools don't use it and go to a different website. Whose loss is that, yours or theirs?
You have the power!! :-)
Oh, and forget about those fucking glasses. They are not important.
Nowadays they also track you by location and IP so deleting cookies barely does anything to improve your privacy.
My IP address changes every few days (or more often if I want it to), and it comes from a pool of IP addresses that cover an area that includes multiple millions of people in a radius of at least 50 miles. If they can track me with that without some other form of persistent ID (like a cookie), my hat is off to them!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020