And also bcs the opt-in is only the first stage when there are articles about the change, in a few months it will be opt-out (and called opt out of enhanced privacy which will also be a lie).
I’m just saying it’s opt-in, which it definitely is. It’s not “sneaky” if it’s literally clearly out in the open. They’re not “lying” and they are conforming to EU law which is quite strict on this topic.
You are choosing to accept their terms of service, and if you don’t like them, just use a different browser??
It’s opt-in for not because they’re testing how tolerant users are. They’ll start bending you over soon enough.
So if it’s opt-in, how is it sneaky?
Bcs the opt-in is called enhanced ad privacy …
And also bcs the opt-in is only the first stage when there are articles about the change, in a few months it will be opt-out (and called opt out of enhanced privacy which will also be a lie).
I’m just saying it’s opt-in, which it definitely is. It’s not “sneaky” if it’s literally clearly out in the open. They’re not “lying” and they are conforming to EU law which is quite strict on this topic.
You are choosing to accept their terms of service, and if you don’t like them, just use a different browser??
How is this not sneaky/intentionally misleading?
If you say “no, I do not want Enhanced Ad Privacy” then they won’t track you.
If you say “yes, I want the Enhanced Ad Privacy” then they will track you.
(*track you in the sense of what’s discussed here, the local browsing history)
I’m sure EU will consider this as not compliant.
And no, I never used Chrome.
And also no, monopolies should not be able to fully dictate their own ToS.
I disagree in that it’s misleading. But how dafuq du they have a monopoly on web browsers? That’s just stupid