• Ferk@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 minutes ago

        True. Same for Android. I feel some form of that should be part of the approach. Splitting it carelessly would likely either:

        A) result in no real change: ie. instead of allocating budgets within Google, they’ll just exchange money through deals and partnerships, as separate companies, but still having pretty much the same relationship between projects and level of control (Google & Chrome would continue holding an advantageous position, even as independent companies)

        B) result in more monetization and more shady schemes being pushed into those projects to try and squeeze their profit (although, to be honest Mozilla has proven that being non-profit is not a shield against this either)

      • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Absolutely.

        The only reason Chrome has been slowing down the deprecation of 3rd party cookies is because it would make it harder to do privacy invading tracking, and thus, would make Google less money.

        No browser benefits from tracking. Only ad companies do.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Indeed, it’s a huge conflict of interest for an ad company to operate the most popular browser. Google being the gatekeeper for the internet is a really terrible situation for the web as a whole.