I’m sure Google has their own shitty reasons, but also get bent, shitheads 🖕
of course Google wants to know everywhere you go
deleted
they didn’t have a good excuse for getting a list of every web page, or at least every domain, you visited
I guess this move is way bigger than that, it is really about becoming the middle man to the internet, check my comment here: https://lemmy.world/comment/5279221
Great, Google and Cloudflare taking yet another chunk for the Internet. Becoming the middle-man in everything.
Are you saying Google should hand over the IP addresses it collects to advertisers and data brokers? That seems like the exact opposite of what they should do. I prefer Google having my IP over Google and a million other companies having my IP.
I doubt this shit will fly in the eventual antitrust case that this will trigger, but I’m with Google on this one.
Are you saying Google should hand over the IP addresses (…) I prefer Google having my IP over Google and a million other companies having my IP.
What I prefer is not making the entire Internet into something that only works because Google+Cloudflare work as this giant man-in-the-middle / proxy for everything out there. If Google actually makes this service the default behavior on Chrome that’s where we’re going, think about it, hosting providers, datacenters and ISPs will simply assume that to reach any website you’ll be going to Google and Cloudflare’s servers, then they’ll prioritize traffic to those, enter into special agreements and obliterate net neutrality in a new way.
This can really spiral-down into a situation where you can’t even reach websites if you don’t use that service very quickly. I bet both of companies will push for that scenario because if they do then they’ll become the middle man and be able to tax everyone on Internet traffic, strong-arm ISPs and push their cloud hosting offerings with cheaper prices and advantages that other provides can’t match because they aren’t on the middle. Just think about how much money CL can do selling “proxy / near edge advanced caching for websites” and stuff like “if you host in Google Cloud you’ll get that caching service at proxy level for free” and then they proceed to place even more servers in your ISP’s datacenters to cache said content. ISPs will be happy as this will limit the amount of peering and “outside traffic” they’ve to do and CL+Google will own the Internet even more.
this shit will fly in the eventual antitrust case that this will trigger
Yes the EU will be very happy to go against Google on this one as this look a lot like a classical case of dominant market position abuse and an anti-competititve scheme.
I agree on the Cloudflare issue, but this is a client side feature, so I don’t think ti’s comparable. You can use Firefox or Safari or Brave or whatever else if you don’t want this feature. Google had a data saver built into Chrome years ago that also routed every image request through Google, and I don’t think more than a small percentage ever turned that on.
As far as I can tell, the setup of this service won’t involve any caching, it’s just a pseudo VPN like the one Apple built, only without the privacy protecting you from Apple itself.
The diference is that Google says they want to make this feature the default - not something you’ve to enable like the image proxy.
the setup of this service won’t involve any caching, it’s just a pseudo VPN l
Yes right now it doesn’t but the path is obvious. Chrome has a 63% market-share, if you get half of the Internet using this service by default you can be sure that ISPs will even offer datacenter space to Cloudflare as long as they maintain the hardware and cache of the Internet inside their networks. After all they already have similar agreements like this for their CDN.
Centralize the internet MORE until there is only ONE SITE. Only then will it be PERFET.
Well Facebook tried that.
Isn’t Elon attempting that with X?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
IP Protection, previously referred to as “ip-blindness” or “Gnatcatcher,” is a proxy system similar to Apple’s Privacy Relay.
MOW objects to this project as a violation of Google’s commitments to the CMA, a set of promises the ad biz made to the UK competition watchdog to win approval for its plan to replace third-party cookies with Privacy Sandbox technologies.
“Google’s IP Protection means ISPs will no longer have visibility of data via an IP address whist leaving Google with the ability to monitor and process data at all times,” says a letter from MOW’s London-based legal representative Preiskel & Co LLP to the CMA and to UK telecom regulator Ofcom, which was provided to The Register.
And marketers, like law enforcement agencies, fear that privacy technologies will leave them in the dark and without the lucrative data they’ve come to depend upon.
For example, one pseudonymous individual who claims to help advertising clients optimize Google AdWords campaigns says that IP addresses play a critical role in fraud prevention.
“This is a blatant and egregious breach of the commitments made by Google to the CMA to prevent it acting in an anti-competitive fashion,” said Tim Cowen, co-founder of MOW, in a statement provided to The Register.
The original article contains 777 words, the summary contains 205 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Good for Google (ikr) for basically telling other tracking/ad companies to f*** off.
Also, bad, for the monopoly reasons.
I see iOS folks getting told to use Private Relay(?) all the time (with i-something disabled). How is this any different than that, other than being run by G?
Not going to use it myself, but I guess its sort of a step in the right direction for the uninformed tech-illiterate. The next step would be to show the average person how to do the same thing without G’s help.
