You must log in or register to comment.
This is misleading. Not sure if by ignorance or malice, but it’s very misleading.
This isn’t 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.
You should be mad about the things google does. I don’t think this particular thing is unreasonable though.
Why not?
They have a duty to moderate public-facing systems. This is a link/bookmark sharing system, so obviously bookmarks that are pointing to things that are illegal are going to be dealt with.
-
OP claimed it’s his private bookmarks not facing public
-
the site doesn’t contain any illegal content. It’s just google being overzealous and intrusive
-
Google Keep Notes has a sharing note feature. You think it would ok for them to sniff what you noting and delete it if they didn’t like it?
-
one again - there’s nothing illegal on that website, nor is accessing it or sharing it’s address
OP claimed it’s his private bookmarks not facing public
OP is mistaken. Read the email in the screenshot.
Let’s try reading the articles before discussing them, next time.
-
They don’t have to, they choose to. You can share bookmarks on Firefox, but Mozilla doesn’t filter nor censor them Orwellian style.
I’m pretty sure there are reasonable expectations by governments that you maintain adequate moderation, especially the EU. If Mozilla were to deploy a public facing system and not moderate it, they would catch hell from the EU and likely be fined out the ass.
Orwellian is when company does thing I don’t like
No, that’s when they’re fascists
No, it’s when the company attempts to assume the role of a governing body and delves into the privacy of people’s bedrooms.
If you’re going to store something on someone else’s computer (Google cloud), they have every right to control what is and is not allowed on their systems. Don’t like it? Use encryption, selfhost, etc…
I would love to hear that from Google’s spokesperson.
This person fucks.
Chad comment although I agree with other person that this is not the worst of Google’s crimes.
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.
Depends if it’s illegal or not. In your case it’s probably illegal.
In that case they deleted a link to illegal content in their jurisdiction - so should be fine - shouldn’t it?
IMO defending Google is the underhanded move.
Sharing misleading info means people are less likely to believe you on real issues.
Firefox IS better, Chrome’s meddling IS a problem. We don’t need to make stuff up in favor of that, and clarifying the point isn’t “defending Google”
Every single comment chain on this thread besides this chain are 100% wrong and operating on misleading information. I fucking hate how up in arms people get when they don’t even have the full picture - even the basics, like having read the fucking article.
DAE GOOGLE BAD???
I don’t give a fuck if you like Google or not, but spreading misleading FUD is the real underhanded move.
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
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.
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 Chromium.
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”.
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
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.
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.
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.
Encrypted between… Chrome and Chrome? Two installations of Google’s non-FOSS browser? You never really had control over that data.
