This is misleading. Not sure if by ignorance or malice, but it's very misleading.
This isn't happening with your browser bookmarks. This is Google Collections, which is a shareable bookmarking feature, meaning it can be made publicly available. That's why it's moderated. It's basically Google's version on something like Pinterest.
Even so - it's not an excuse meddle with it, whatever you call it. Fuck Google.
So if you have a collection with political targets and the folder is just google maps links to their houses with their names as the bookmark name google shouldn't be allowed to stop you from spreading this?
Sure google is shitty but this feature is designed to share links with other people and sometimes those links can be dangerous so imho it's absolutely necessary to moderate them at some level.
IMO defending Google is the underhanded move.
DAE GOOGLE BAD???
I don't give a fuck if you like Google or not, but spreading misleading FUD is the real underhanded move.
There are plenty of valid reasons to be critical of Google. This ain't one.
IMO targeting someone you don't like with antipathy regardless of their actions is a sociopathic move.
All the more reason to switch to Firefox
Wouldn't change the rules of Google Collections?
This isn't a Chrome thing....
Yep I use Firefox for everything, but I keep chrome installed as a backup when needed.
The most common reason for opening chrome is for Google related things. Certain google docs features like the add-ons store only worked in Chrome, but the add-ons themselves work anywhere. Or signing into Google Drive desktop app failed when the auth window opened in Firefox or Edge, but it worked in Chrome.
I just thought that was Chrome breaking things in other browsers intentionally, since no other services had that kind of issue.
Yeah Ive not heard of Pocket getting meddled with yet
I would but Firefox is behind on many things including UI, speed, and other things. One of the main reasons is compatibility. A lot of things in html, css, and js don't yet work in Firefox but do on chromium based browsers. This is even clearly outlined by Mozilla in mdn web docs. The only thing with worse compatibility is safari (who could've seen that one coming). Also it seems like this is a Google thing so it probably only affects chrome and not chromium. I'm waiting for arc to be on Windows but if you want chrome without most of Google's spyware shit just use chromium. You don't need a chromium based browser if you can just use chromium itself.
Edit: you guys need to chill with the responses. There is so many that sync won't let me respond despite me writing paragraphs that address everything you guys are concerned about like saying everything works (all of webkit doesn't).
Yeah but if anything doesn't work correctly it's specifically because of the Chromium monopoly on the direction of web development. It's almost a reason unto itself to move to Firefox. It's like saying "what's the point in shopping at a mom and pop store when Amazon basically won the future of capitalism anyway?" As an argument it's just "let's give up and let Google win."
There was a post on this yesterday.
They are moderating something, the issue with the article was it's not user's bookmarks. It's some app-specific feature called collections.
edit: it's the same post...it's a bit weird linking a direct link to a lemee.ee post when they get federated here anyway.....
That's something I hate about the fediverse is that we have so many layers of links that you never get the original article, you get seven recursive links to other federated sites and maybe if you're lucky on the last link you find the original article.
Honestly, I’m not surprised. Not just because of their lack of privacy (them knowing your bookmarks), but also legally. Some countries are trying to crack down on piracy, and other illegal material, asking companies (like Google) to do this.
Bottom line, don’t use Chrome, and Google Sync.
This doesn't involve your browser bookmarks. Google Collections is a link sharing tool.
It doesn't feel legal. A bookmark is textual data you've stored on your computer for later reference, and while it is on their application, somehow this feels wrong. It's definitely wrong ethically, but is there something in the user agreement that says they have full reign of whatever the browser can touch?
Pretty much everything you do on Chrome gets sent to Google. It is one of, if not the worst browsers, for privacy. Their Privacy Policy is pretty clear on this. It’s all for a better “user experience”.
If you actually let bookmarks be local textual data like you've implied, this is actually true - Google can't interfere with them.
The 'Google is deleting your bookmarks!' thing only applies to those who log in to their Google accounts on Chrome, enabling sync, in which case you're not storing favorites in your computer. You're storing them in Google's servers and your client is just replicating a local cache of the data that is now Google's.
There's a comment above explaining that this isn't quite the same as bookmarks
What the actual hell? I hate this so much. Google won't touch right-wing extremist content, yet they'll just poof your bookmarks? Bullshit.
Well right wing extremists support their right to consume and subjugate the entire web into their jurisdiction, so........ No real surprise they back the fascists and their openly violent goals and rhetoric.
For fun though put some content on there about using violence to defend against their violence and see how quick you get moderated into oblivion 😂
laughing in firefoxian.
Not bookmarks. Google collection
well beyond don't be evil
Even if you hate Google, don't go around spreading bullshit, please
It's like big tech corporations have been having a tournament called 'Who's Most Fucked Up' Cup for past few years, we're getting into the finals lately and Google and Microsoft are favourites for the golden medal.
Well.. https://floccus.org/ + https://github.com/TCB13/LoFloccus + Syncthing.
O kir
Pjfwjbkbfoojtehi~~kff@Jerusalemspiderman@lemdro.idmy.world](https://lemmy.world/c/spiderverse)~~b jrbeihtruhihthihrib end wfjuvhvdwugwebdh B at, ibrhipvovdouuvevuef Spider-Man
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !spiderverse@lemmy.world
I wonder how they did it. The sync data is supposed to be protected by E2EE where the key is derived from the user password or an separate sync password, at least before I abandon Chrome and go FF few years ago.
It's not Chrome and it's not through sync.
It's Google Collections. Read the post.
Yes. I read that. Thank you.
And thanks the person clarifying it.
Last I looked, Chrome’s sync is not E2EE. Next to nothing (user space) is E2EE, in Google’s ecosystem. By default it’s only Encryption in Transit. I think you can enable a Passphrase (encryption on device), but that’s optional.
Idk then. I had a separate sync password which will not sync anything after logged on in Chrome until I gave that password.
By default you're correct.
If you navigate to the security section you can define an extra, non-Google account tied, password specifically for browser data. If you do so, it's E2E encrypted.
Encrypted between... Chrome and Chrome? Two installations of Google's non-FOSS browser? You never really had control over that data.
At least what they claim to be back then.
cinched
