Its the same as the new RCS standard that Google has been championing for cell phones. All RCS traffic goes over Google's servers. What google does with that data is anyone's guess.
Anyone at all interested in privacy, wouldn't be using Google products in the first place - especially Chrome.
Exactly. And if we do decide to use a Google product we all know what to expect - no point coming here crying about a self inflicted wound.
The problem with these "features" is not only in privacy, but with giving Google/Alphabet power to control the Web. I don't like tracking/online advertising industry, but I must acknowledge that it finances most of the Web. There are a couple of big players, and hundreds of smaller. This allows for some competition. With this Privacy Sandbox Google will dictate rules how most of the Web is financed. And who have some control overfinances, have some control of the Web... Second "feature" is IP protection. It is meant to protect your IP from the page you are visiting - at the expense of more exposure of your IP and DNS requests to Google! If Google doesn't like some page for whatever reason, it could block that website from visitors. What is even more scary is that in the long run it is possible (just a theory at that point) that some website operators may find users connecting from non-Google-IPs as untrustworthy, because from their end it may seem like a convenient, cheap form of infrastructure and bussiness protection from DDoS, fraud, and deny service!
Yes good point, Google is shady as hell. But this really is a major opportunity for others like Firefox, Vivaldi and DuckDuckGo to steal marketshare by focusing on real privacy features. The problem is that Firefox relies on Google's millions they get paid every year. And that Vivaldi is based on Chromium and DuckDuckGo uses WebView2 which is controlled by M$. Didn't know about this! Thanks for the info.
I doubt that. I'm guessing that the vast majority of browser users don't know or care about privacy, they just want a browser that works or will just use the one given to them. Most people probably more readily identify with a corporation's image -- those who think Google is an evil, capitalistic entity will likely use Firefox in protest. But, do they (the average computer user) do it based specifically on a browser's privacy features? Doubtful. They either do or don't trust the company, and browser technicalities likely don't factor in for them, so tweaking those technicalities or introducing new ones wouldn't have an impact.
I know what you mean, but with perhaps a bit of marketing and creating hype you might be able to reach a couple of million extra users. I do think people care about privacy, they are just not aware yet how shady a browser like Chrome is, and same goes for Edge.
