I’ve noticed that everyone who claims that there is no privacy on the Internet uses some hyperbolic example like “If the government wants to get you, they’ll get you anyway.”
And my answer to this is the following: If the government is your adversary, you have other things to worry about than tracking protection, VPN etc. Then you would likely need stuff like Qubes OS or Tor. This ain’t a normal setup, because the government is not the adversary for most of us, we don’t need anonymity from the government in most cases here.
When we speak about online privacy around here, we usually think of private entities as our adversaries, mainly ad and tracking networks, both big and small ones. That is, the conventional online tracking. And to fight that, browsers can be better or worse equipped.
> You all seem to live in a fantasy land where Chrome, Edge, Opera are the bad ones and someone the others using Privacy as a marketing scheme and as a business to get nice easy $$ are the good guys.
Chrome / Edge / Opera objectively collect more data than the browsers I mentioned above. You can find this out via the respective privacy policies, or via an analysis of the connections various browsers establish: https://brave.com/popular-browsers-first-run/
They also don’t feature isolation of local data or fingerprinting protections, key elements of making tracking you harder. Chrome and Edge in particular also mean to cripple ad- and tracking blockers with Manifest V3 in the future while e.g. Brave or Bromite include native adblockers unaffected by such crippling efforts.
> If you cared about your information you would unplug from the internet, not stay on the internet but complain how some companies might gather more or less data from you.
What we talk about here is a reduction of data collection about us. Not total anonymity, if you need that, you are fundamentally looking at the wrong setups. And limiting data collection is a worthy undertaking in its own right if you ask me, because unwarranted data collection tends to be unethical.
> vivaldi (which doesn’t do anything to stop sending data to Google servers)
You are wrong, Vivaldi is pretty much degoogled for all unnecessary conncetions: https://vivaldi.com/blog/vivaldi-browser-on-android-private/
They retain some connections for basic functionality like Push connections (for notifications) or Google SafeBrowsing (against malware), but you can disable those in the settings as well.
> based on Google’s technology will not do anything for you either….
False. Yes, they are all based on Chromium. No, that does not mean they are all the same. Brave implements stuff like fingerprinting protections, native adblocker, and isolation of local data that are not present in e.g. Chrome, Edge, Opera. Same for Bromite. Kiwi allows extensions on mobile unlike Chrome, Edge, Opera… Some extensions are effective in improving privacy like uBlock Origin, LocalCDN, ClearURLs, Cookie AutoDelete etc.
> not even talking about how you are literally using a phone which is the best data harvesting technology from Government to get your data and know everything about you.
I don’t know what you are talking about. First things first, what OS you run on your phone and what apps you use are fundamentally your choices. For Android phones, there are Custom ROMs like GrapheneOS, CalyxOS, or even /e/ OS which fundamentally respect your privacy as they are stripping out all connections to Google.
It is true that you can’t use a phone as a phone without connecting to a cell tower, and they can locate you via triangulation most likely, but even then, they still need to know that it’s you. How are they going to do this if you bought your smartphone in a store, paid with cash, and hopefully use a SIM card from a provider that is not doing identity verification (not possible in all countries, though, fair enough)? They are just seeing that some phone used by someone established a connection in a certain area.
> But, for example, watch someone like Aaron Jones and how even he says that if you are in USA, it would be much wiser to give info to a Chinese or Russian or whatever non-US company because in theory they will not be able to do much with it, like USA can.
Perhaps but no data collection on the browser at all (e.g. Ungoogled Chromium) is still better than that.
> I have read stories from Australia, USA and recently Canada when someone said something negative about life and two hours later the person got police at the door and took her to a psychiatric.
Hm, if you give a platform your name / address / E-Mail / real phone number, and then proceed to write something very controversial with that account, with a non-anonymized IP address no less, of course they know it’s you and wouldn’t need a backdoor or anything. But the question is, why do something like this with an account where you have already identified yourself when you set it up? This is a major opsec mistake, and anyone who does that has nobody but themselves to blame. Note that I am against government tyranny regardless, my point is how one goes about it.