Madis

As long as the brand new one is legally binding, why not. And it is at least in California.

Are there any checker apps to see which of user’s installed apps have this? Looking up “Play Integrity API” only finds the checkers for the phone itself…

They used to be? When?

https://youtu.be/JOIp4s4YNEs

Some Chromium browsers like Brave and Vivaldi already announced they’ll extend it for as long as they can, and when they no longer can’t, they’ll think of something else like improve their own blockers.

The problem with Language Transfer is its very limited language selection and its format.

Duolingo allows reading, writing, listening and speech (last two can be disabled if unsuitable in your context), and it does not impose daily limits. I’ve yet to find an alternative app that does all 5 of those things.

deleted by creator

I recall there being at least one content blocker that worked by heuristics instead of rulesets. Cannot remember the name, but it was clearly not as effective as conventional ones, because not all ads look the same and usually people want to block the invisible trackers as well.

Floorp looks nice in theory but in practice it is very outdated…

Librewolf gives you options, and if you don’t want to toggle them on, you’re free to do so.

These do sound like they are enabled by default though, hence the breakage?

I believe the protection that Librewolf provides should be considered bare-minimum in this age.

If websites work with them, sure. But if they don’t, try explaining that to your grandma.

LibreWolf does seem to go a bit too far with the hardening. It’s fine if you’re used to Tor Browser or Mull Browser but as a general recommendation… ehh.

The same approach would make sense in Firefox too though. And as far as I know, Firefox’s equivalent option is still about:config-only anyway.

Yes, it blocks ads, and likely the YouTube ones too. The current problem with YouTube is just their anti-adblocker which needs very frequent filter updates and unlike MV2, filter updates in MV3 need the update of the entire extension (think approval periods etc).

Well, Firefox also plans to deprecate MV2 at some point (deadline to be announced at the end of this year), the difference is just that their implementation of MV3 is more flexible at the points Chrome was criticized for.

Vivaldi and Brave are planning to extend the deadline of MV2 by some extent, not sure if it means just like the enterprise policy or will they keep the implementation in code for longer.

Well… dependencies can still exist, which would justify the “system” marking. For example, different programs’ WebViews depend on Edge nowadays, though maybe it is possible to isolate having that rendering engine without having the full browser program.

Okay, that is a very good point that I did not realize.

Because that way people thought they were directly paying for the service they were using, instead of being the product of said platform, having their personal data harvested and sold to the highest bidder?

Are you saying that people perceived WhatsApp as better than SMS or better than Facebook?

The red flag is to look at a free meal and not wonder what the catch might be. Especially to this day, with all we learned about what the tech majors do with all the data.

That’s not my point. My point is why would the majority of the world do this when they knew it was going to be paid.

I can’t think of other product examples where people would so gladly accept trial versions of otherwise free feature-equivalent services. Maybe WinRAR, but that could be replaced with any other product instantly anyway (no network effect), should it ever get enforce its trial.

Ironically, it got popular when it still tried to get users to subscribe to a monthly payment. And as it was one of the few messaging platforms to be (in the future) paid at all, I cannot understand why it ever got popular…

Well, sure, Meta cancelled the subscription plans later but to me it sounded a red flag in the first place.

Even Facebook and Apple have “privacy” webpages on their websites. It means nothing. Actions and consequences speak louder than words.

So you’d not post either if they update their privacy policy or privacy tools (for better or worse)?

All I’m saying is that it is okay to limit some kind of news that don’t add any value, but those that do, should be posted, regardless of what the opinion on the company itself is.