Paedophile is when people I don’t like.

Meanwhile, these same people lose their minds at others using the dictionary definition of gender.

You don’t visit the site when you punch a query into your browser search bar.

Ultimately, Google are making the change they are because they know how deceptive they were being. Google knows it, I know it, Google seems concerned the courts know it, I’m not sure why you’d choose to dig in on this one.

That lack of delineation is also an issue, but a separate one. That said, I’d think an average user would think doing a Google search from an incog tab would be anonymised and not tied to them because of the privacy incog grants (or more accurately, doesn’t). There’s reasonable arguments to be made on either side of this point, but I think that Google have been intentionally misleading - which is now creating problems for them, motivating this change.

Again, all the information Google present when opening an incog tab would lead someone to the conclusion that Google won’t track them. Unless I’m mistaken, when this came up years back, Google explicitly denied tracking people in incognito mode, and they’re only changing their disclaimers now in response to a multi-billion dollar lawsuit.

No thoughts on the perception they seem to be crafting very deliberately?

Because the AI isn’t needed, and would be computationally expensive.

Extensions like ublock origin and sponsorblock work just fine.

To be clear, I was aware of the risk thanks to previous reports and my work in the cybersecurity space. I’m talking about the average user.

The name is deceptive, and explicitly calling out a list of parties that may see your traffic without naming themselves is deceptive.

It’s akin to a guard saying beware doors 1 and 3 - there are dragons behind them. If you hear this from an authority that would know, you’d probably assume there’s not a dragon behind door 2, or they would have said so.

The perception of “the man on the street” is a common legal standard that I’d argue Google has fallen short of here.

I don’t use Chrome because I don’t trust Google. I assumed they were tracking users based on previous reports.

I’m saying that i think a reasonable person would expect that their incognito browsing traffic wouldn’t be monitored and passed to Google. This reasonable person standard is the legal standard for advertising and marketing claims in my country and many others.

The disclaimer explicitly calls out that your activity might still be visible to sites, you visit, your employer or school, and your ISP - they notably say nothing about Google. That kind of thing is very misleading.

Where in that disclaimer (or otherwise) would I get the impression Google will track me?

Expected incognito functionality sits in the gaping chasm between actual incognito functionality and TOR. When I’m being told I can go incognito - you know, sneaky, in disguise, I don’t expect to have all of my activity broadcast back to those that say I’m incognito.

Of course, trusting current Google is foolish, but that doesn’t make it less deceptive.

We need time get comfortable trusting games companies that have the track record they do not to fuck customers that have trusted they’ll continue to provide access to their games rather than arbitrarily removing them, adding game-ruining monetisation, fucking with subscription prices gating access to their libraries and generally acting like shady arseholes?

Suuure - sign me up.

It’s a bit difficult to pull off a mass shooting from a prison cell, no?

Edit: It’s hilarious you clowns think this is a hot take.

I’d imagine if you set fire to the places you spend time in, you’d know a bit about homelessness - but something tells me you’re more interested in kicking people when they’re down for giggles.

That’s been the outcome, but I think you’re dramatically overestimating Musk if you think that was his intent.

It seems clear to me that he’s of below average intelligence with an overinflated, incredibly fragile ego.

Oh - we absolutely should be doing that, particularly when the passengers can use the Internet on flights already - but that seems like a (entirely reasonable) heavier lift, compared to a trivial storage upgrade and/or a minor config change to match euro standards or better.

It all is stupid.

I naturally assumed zitheads or shitheads, given the standard pronunciation of ‘x’ in words…

My cheap dashcam does rolling saves if days worth of HD video… but aviation safety can only manage 2 hours of audio? Weeks worth of buffer should be trivial to add from both an economic and operational standpoint, and would have solved this issue (though not the door, obviously).

The logs should be getting pushed to a meaningful amount of local storage, and radio chatter saved centrally (there’s almost certainly amateurs stockpiling these recordings - large institutions are definitely capable).

Has it?

The USSR was definitionally about as socialist as the DPRK is democratic. I don’t know why you’d believe either of them - particularly when you seem so pessimistic about such “socialist” regimes.

Real modern capitalism hadn’t been tried until it had… nor had mercantile capitalism before that… or feudalism before that… Doing things that haven’t been done is a necessary part of progress - you do understand that, don’t you?

I think the issue is more with the fact that only 1265 people have been rounded up, that they’ve had an average sentence of a year for an insurrection, and frankly, that they weren’t shot when trying to take the capitol building by force while chanting about lynching elected officials.

“If I get arrested, I’ll say I’m a woman and rape everyone.” is hilarious and definitely not a screaming self-report.

What was your favourite trans joke from this set? Maybe the super-relevant one about the 2 year old music video? The plainly stated Daily Wire talking points maybe?

Definitely.

Believe it or not, leftists tend to not be humourless wokescolds and oppression Olympians like the right had to start pretending they are when they abandoned remotely defensible arguments, and had to fall back on being “triggering”.

Others have shared jokes (which I haven’t watched yet), so I’ll skip butchering one myself.