Google agrees to settle Chrome incognito mode class action lawsuit

Comments

• JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Not surprising in the least. Just another ‘Trust us bro’ from one of the tech firms.

  source
• vexikron@lemmy.zip ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  And yet we /still/ have people who assume that corporations that routinely pull of shit like this, who have more or less complete control over your Android phone, default to tying everything on your phone to your Google account, and then also put an enormous amount of effort to making the default easiest option to log in to nearly any online service or app also be your Google account…

  …we still have people that do not believe that the phones are always listening when seemingly any website or app you use gives you advertisements about what you were just talking about in the other room with the phone locked.

  source

  • whatwhatwhatwhat@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I actually saw a video once where the argument was that phones aren’t listening. Rather, Google (and Meta and the like) have so many other data points on you that they don’t need to listen. Listening to you would be far less efficient and far less insightful than relying on their vast network of other data they have on you. Even if you don’t use a single Google product, you’re still not safe.

    Reminds me of the story where Target knew a customer was pregnant before she did. They started sending her ads for pregnancy/baby products before she even knew she was pregnant, all because they had so much data on her.

    In my opinion, this is way more terrifying and problematic than if they were listening to us.

    source

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      In my opinion, this is way more terrifying and problematic than if they were listening to us.

      Exactly. This is what I try to explain to people when they bring up the listening.

      Somehow it’s difficult for many to comprehend this. They find the listening easier to understand.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • vexikron@lemmy.zip ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Oh I agree that is happening … as well.

      See my argument for /the phones really are listening and watching/ is pretty simple.

      Parental Control mode.

      A phone with parental control mode on does NOT let the user know it is on.

      And it can listen, know your location, see what you are doing, etc.

      It will even lie to the user and tell them location tracking is disabled… when it actually is not.

      If the OS has the capability to do these things and lie to the user about it… only showing up as strange bursts of google and android services firing off network activity when there shouldn’t be any…

      … then we know the OS has the ability to listen to you. Voice recognition isnt perfect for many reasons, but all your phone has to do is hear enough key words and make them out, and the fire off a little network burst of the key words to something like AdSense, or via a closed source api directly into an app.

      Then all that has to happen is tech companies lie to their users and assume either they will never be definitively caught, or that if they are caught, they’ll survive the fine, and do other market tactics to make it so competitors who do not spy on users never gain marketshare, including just buying them out.

      To me its similar to the argument around most anti cheat engines in games: nearly all of them are closed source, networked root kits. Its why to this day many online games cannot be played on linux: devs often seemingly just assume that linux players are hackers by default. Never mind that this is not true at all, that the vast, vast majority of actual hacks exploit vulnerabilities in windows and are sold on shady forums and darknet sites.

      What you end up with is the current anti cheat paradigm for many large game studios of forcing pc players to use anti cheat software that causes massive performance issues, has full total kernel level access to your system, and you cant reveal anything about the code because then the hackers would know how to hack better! … Even though anti cheat software does not actually work to stop hacks.

      Again the argument is: These are tech companies that would gain significantly by knowing as much about their players as possible for market research, we know the code is capable of spying.

      Basically, motive, opportunity, murder weapon present at the scene but it cannot be determined if it was actually used, because the suspect will not let anyone examine it. Suspect has a conviction track record of killing people with similar weapons and would stand to gain financially from commiting the murder.

      Obviously not a perfect analogy, but maybe reframing it like that gives a bit different perspective?

      source
    • Hoomod@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Like what Cambridge Analytica did?

      source
    • thejml@lemm.ee ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      This is really what’s likely happening. Running a microphone + speech decoding 24x7 on a device with limited battery and limited, metered bandwidth is quite a proposition, especially when there are so many ways to prevent microphone usage (not to mention how wrong Siri and Google and Alexa get things wrong). It’s far easier to just gather data that people willingly provide and extrapolate.

      source
    • lemming741@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Target knew before her dad, not her

      source
  • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    we still have people that do not believe that the phones are always listening when seemingly any website or app you use gives you advertisements about what you were just talking about in the other room with the phone locked.

    Oh come on. Don’t bring this into conspiracy territory. Yes, eavesdropping does happen, but it’s not something an uncompromised Android phone will do when locked. Even when it does happen in the case of spyware, the people doing it aren’t selling your transcriptions to advertisers.

    People should still opt out of as many of GAPS’s spyware-like features as possible, as you suggest, but not because it’s a special anti-listening-device warding spell.

    source

    • Mango@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      conspiracy theory

      Get out.

      bgr.com/…/marketing-company-says-it-can-eavesdrop….

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Mango@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  So who are they settling with? Where’s my cut? Why do I have to settle for what those other people agreed to?

  source

  • MumboJumbo@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I anal, but also IANAL. If you ever opt in or are part of a class action lawsuit by default, you do not have to accept the results. You can refuse your cut, but you typically have to actively refute it, otherwise you’re assumed to be cool with it. If you do refuse the settlement, you can pursue your own legal actions.

    source
  • skeezix@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I got a check for 73 cents.

    source
• autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  This is the best summary I could come up with:

  ---

  Google has indicated that it is ready to settle a class-action lawsuit filed in 2020 over its Chrome browser’s Incognito mode.

  Arising in the Northern District of California, the lawsuit accused Google of continuing to “track, collect, and identify [users’] browsing data in real time” even when they had opened a new Incognito window.

  It also alleged that sites using Google Analytics or Ad Manager collected information from browsers in Incognito mode, including web page content, device data, and IP address.

  Google initially attempted to have the lawsuit dismissed by pointing to the message displayed when users turned on Chrome’s incognito mode.

  Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected Google’s bid for summary judgement in August, pointing out that Google never revealed to its users that data collection continued even while surfing in Incognito mode.

  According to the notice filed on Tuesday, Google and the plaintiffs have agreed to terms that will result in the litigation being dismissed.

  ---

  The original article contains 289 words, the summary contains 156 words. Saved 46%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  source
• jenny_ball@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  was it always supposed to look like Heisenberg?

  source
• hh93@lemm.ee ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I always assumed incognito was just disabling history and cookies.

  source

  • 4am@lemm.ee ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Yup that’s it

    source