Bottom line --- Google is privacy invasion by default.
I use e/OS with Brave browser --- privacy by default. Both based on Google source but cleansed and stripped of tracking.
Personalized ads are mainly an annoyance and a really dumb idea in my opinion. Context sensitive ads are much easier to implement, more privacy respecting and the only ones that are moderately useful and acceptable.
> Bottom line --- Google is privacy invasion by default.
Basically. This is how they make their money. So, no one should be under any illusions about the culture of Google and all of their adherents. Go wants to introduce tool-chain telemetry as a default (opt-out only).
I have a bunch of issues with the "Privacy Sandbox", but my #1 issue is that it's called "Privacy Sandbox". That term implies that a sandbox is being used to preserve your privacy, when it is, in fact, a system designed for the opposite of that.
After all the crap that Google put in Android, I still don't understand why some other alternative ecosystems like Ubuntu Phone or GrapheneOS or Mankato (PinePhone) aren't attractive for users and developers.
What's holding everyone back? I understand that without users there won't be apps, but also without apps there won't be users, since they offer just the basics.
Imagine if TikTok or WhatsApp have had an app for those others OSes
This is an industry standard brain wash technique that is used in many products.
Just yesterday I actually had time to read that new Apple "Privacy" Statement that pops up on a Mac for some reason since a few weeks and they put a blunt lie on top about how "private" their service is and just a few lines later they tell you that they grab actually all your private data.
Every EU website now pops up a "privacy statement" where they actually tell you that they DO NOT respect your privacy.
I am sure there is a technical term for that, I would simply describe it as "producing cognitive dissonance in the most obvious way and make it look fine".
It took already an enormous effort to get all these companies to actually have to report about their abuse of your private data, in EU even make users agree.
However, it did not change anything - most companies still break your privacy even with more fun doing it, as you agreed.
A terrible and wasteful development of modern primitive capitalism.
I've been staunchly on the Android side of the Android / iOS question, but this carry-on with refusing to block tracking like Apple has done is really making me consider switching.
You can buy a ready to use phone on their web site or you can install the OS on a compatible phone of your own. I have installed this on about 10 phones (all Motorola) for friends and family. Here is an example of one that I just put together as a Christmas present.
With hardware remote attestation there will no longer be any point in even owning an android phone anyway. Android is obviously inferior to iOS in every way but the whole point was you could have control over the machine and do whatever you wanted. Now apps will be able to verify that you "tampered" with the phone and will refuse to run, and since it's hardware cryptography it cannot be faked without massive effort. Might as well get an iPhone which at least isn't a shitty Google product.
Termux is the one android exclusive software I can't live without and they managed to fuck even that up by killing processes indiscriminately in order to save battery or whatever. If there's no solution by the time my phone dies, my next one will be an iPhone.
I'm considering one of the Linux phones, don't use many apps anyway. I know that's a hard sell for most but it's becoming a real option even for normal users.
Its even worse, its not replacing current tracking!
> On Android, the Privacy Sandbox tracking is in addition to all the usual individual tracking methods; it's not being pitched as an alternative to anything. The Privacy Sandbox on Android is toothless, and Google has no plans to reduce tracking on Android.
The really crazy part --- it doesn't have to be this way.
Google could easily switch to context sensitive ads but they don't because advertisers pay extra for "personalized".
Personally, I doubt anyone can really justify the added expense. The entire process is opaque to make any comparison difficult if not impossible. Just because I bought pet supplies last week, does it really make sense for pets supply ads to follow me all over the internet --- even on unrelated web sites?
I just tried GrapheneOS yesterday. Installation on my new phone was a breeze, but once I was in, there was... Nothing. The "Apps" app, which I assumed was an alternative to the Google Play store, had literally nothing except a link to install Google Play services.
So I installed that and the Play store, which, due to GrapheneOS's sandboxing, was probably better than the stock Android. But it didn't even work well. Plenty of apps I tried to install wouldn't. After about 3hrs of playing with it, I said "fuck it," and flashed the stock Android back onto the phone.
I really want to switch, but that was far too much work.
I recently switched to that myself. Tired of Google not respecting our private lives and wanting to know every single action we take. Wish it worked on more phones than just the Pixel line so more people could use it
The whole point is this will replace more intrusive tracking. It is trying to make it viable for businesses to switch to something that protects people's privacy more without killing off companies that depend on effective advertising. Apple took a poor approch in not having viable replacement before their changes and this resulted in many companies being negatively effected and many companies going out of business. When you make a big change to your ecosystem you need to consider all of the stakeholders else you can cause a subset of people to experience a lot of pain.
The author falsely claims Chrome is killing off ad blockers too with manifest v3 since manifest v3 protects the privacy and security of users better. This guy isn't consistent about being pro privacy. He simply hates Google. Manifest v3 doesn't even kill off ad blockers, nor does the Chrome team intend to as they have been improving the APIs to enable them to function. The strongest argument is that chrome extension store will reject manifest v3 extensions that want overly broad permission to access the content of any site you visit.
Google could protect privacy very easy by letting me filter app in the app store by capabilities. I can not just see apps that do not X or Y. Whole app store is still a great malware distribution project - horrible. Managers responsible for that mess should go to jail for twenty years.
I have been using LineageOS on old Pixels/LG phones for over a year and half now. So far no real problems and it is hella lot faster then the stock Android they came with. I find my needs really just sit between a dumb phone and all the gadgets and software of the latest smartphones - if it can call, run a chat messenger, snap an occasional photo that's really about it.
I don't really get the point of the article. You can opt out of the privacy sandbox and block interests you don't want apps to see. The biggest change seems to be that chrome cand feed data into this system through an Android API, but doesn't this already happen through telemetry, analytics scripts and fingerprinting? You can also just not use chrome.
The point of the article is that Google is pitching Privacy Sandbox as the Android counterpart to Apple's App Tracking Transparency, when, in reality, it's anything but. App Tracking Transparency disables tracking unless the user opts in. Privacy Sandbox only disables tracking if the developer opts in. You can see this by reviewing the developer documentation [1] for Privacy Sandbox. It's totally optional on the part of the developer. Pitching Privacy Sandbox as an alternative to ATT deceptive marketing.
Anyone remember FLOC, which google attempted to push through on the web and then was forced to abandon? [1]. This just seems to be "floc, but for mobile apps".
lol imagine being a "journalist" in the current year and writing "Rather than match iOS's tracking limits, Google built an additional tracking system." as if you think iOS tracking does anything close to what it says it's going to do ( ex https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-analytics-privacy-4th-lawsu... ).
This is a hit peace written by an iZealot who doesn't even address Apple's system shortcomings.
Ron Amadeo is so relentlessly critical of Google I've stopped reading his articles. Overall I find coverage on Ars to be pretty good but he really seems to have an axe to grind.
[+] [-] jqpabc123|3 years ago|reply
I use e/OS with Brave browser --- privacy by default. Both based on Google source but cleansed and stripped of tracking.
Personalized ads are mainly an annoyance and a really dumb idea in my opinion. Context sensitive ads are much easier to implement, more privacy respecting and the only ones that are moderately useful and acceptable.
[+] [-] chasil|3 years ago|reply
I run Lineage, where I have not loaded any version of Gapps.
My goto browser is Bromite (https://www.bromite.org), which I have configured default incognito and otherwise high security.
I have loaded Magisk, then the modules for MicroG:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MicroG/comments/shmpng/confirmed_sa...
Wouldn't it be great if all Android users could wake up to this tomorrow? It would be an interesting day.
I should try e/OS sometime. The guy who maintained Mandrake Linux is in charge.
[+] [-] deafpolygon|3 years ago|reply
Basically. This is how they make their money. So, no one should be under any illusions about the culture of Google and all of their adherents. Go wants to introduce tool-chain telemetry as a default (opt-out only).
[+] [-] JohnFen|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Maxburn|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] madduci|3 years ago|reply
What's holding everyone back? I understand that without users there won't be apps, but also without apps there won't be users, since they offer just the basics.
Imagine if TikTok or WhatsApp have had an app for those others OSes
[+] [-] zeagle|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PYTHONDJANGO|3 years ago|reply
Just yesterday I actually had time to read that new Apple "Privacy" Statement that pops up on a Mac for some reason since a few weeks and they put a blunt lie on top about how "private" their service is and just a few lines later they tell you that they grab actually all your private data.
Every EU website now pops up a "privacy statement" where they actually tell you that they DO NOT respect your privacy.
I am sure there is a technical term for that, I would simply describe it as "producing cognitive dissonance in the most obvious way and make it look fine".
It took already an enormous effort to get all these companies to actually have to report about their abuse of your private data, in EU even make users agree.
However, it did not change anything - most companies still break your privacy even with more fun doing it, as you agreed.
A terrible and wasteful development of modern primitive capitalism.
[+] [-] lakomen|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shmapf|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kube-system|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jqpabc123|3 years ago|reply
https://e.foundation/
You can buy a ready to use phone on their web site or you can install the OS on a compatible phone of your own. I have installed this on about 10 phones (all Motorola) for friends and family. Here is an example of one that I just put together as a Christmas present.
https://www.amazon.com/Motorola-T-Mobile-Unlocked-XT2113-2-S...
As a de-Googled phone, the Google Play store doesn't work but that's no big loss because I can get any software I need from F-Droid and Aurora Store.
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aurora.store/
[+] [-] matheusmoreira|3 years ago|reply
Termux is the one android exclusive software I can't live without and they managed to fuck even that up by killing processes indiscriminately in order to save battery or whatever. If there's no solution by the time my phone dies, my next one will be an iPhone.
[+] [-] codemac|3 years ago|reply
You realize that Apple is still doing the tracking, just not allowing third parties?
[+] [-] worksonmine|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] skrowl|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] McDyver|3 years ago|reply
They didn't get buy-in from other browsers, so they are doing it at OS level.
Nice /s
0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_Learning_of_Cohort...
[+] [-] jacooper|3 years ago|reply
> On Android, the Privacy Sandbox tracking is in addition to all the usual individual tracking methods; it's not being pitched as an alternative to anything. The Privacy Sandbox on Android is toothless, and Google has no plans to reduce tracking on Android.
[+] [-] nargas|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jqpabc123|3 years ago|reply
Google could easily switch to context sensitive ads but they don't because advertisers pay extra for "personalized".
Personally, I doubt anyone can really justify the added expense. The entire process is opaque to make any comparison difficult if not impossible. Just because I bought pet supplies last week, does it really make sense for pets supply ads to follow me all over the internet --- even on unrelated web sites?
[+] [-] userbinator|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] baynoob|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] NayamAmarshe|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jszymborski|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mynameisash|3 years ago|reply
So I installed that and the Play store, which, due to GrapheneOS's sandboxing, was probably better than the stock Android. But it didn't even work well. Plenty of apps I tried to install wouldn't. After about 3hrs of playing with it, I said "fuck it," and flashed the stock Android back onto the phone.
I really want to switch, but that was far too much work.
[+] [-] danjoredd|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] charcircuit|3 years ago|reply
The author falsely claims Chrome is killing off ad blockers too with manifest v3 since manifest v3 protects the privacy and security of users better. This guy isn't consistent about being pro privacy. He simply hates Google. Manifest v3 doesn't even kill off ad blockers, nor does the Chrome team intend to as they have been improving the APIs to enable them to function. The strongest argument is that chrome extension store will reject manifest v3 extensions that want overly broad permission to access the content of any site you visit.
[+] [-] PYTHONDJANGO|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] euix|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacooper|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bno1|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shakna|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quanticle|3 years ago|reply
[1]: https://developer.android.com/design-for-safety/privacy-sand...
[+] [-] jacooper|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duringmath|3 years ago|reply
Every other outlet "google releasing their version of Apple's ATT"
Ars Technica guy "Google will watch you while you sleep"
[+] [-] seanhunter|3 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2022/1/25/22900567/google-floc-aban...
[+] [-] pleb_nz|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tyfon|3 years ago|reply
That's all I need to know personally.
[+] [-] CharlesW|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Lucyj001|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] skrowl|3 years ago|reply
This is a hit peace written by an iZealot who doesn't even address Apple's system shortcomings.
[+] [-] newaccount2021|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Lucyj001|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] cageface|3 years ago|reply