Man, they really want you to use Firefox
I can't imagine depending on Google to store anything. They shouldn't be able to even see what links you save.
Yeah, this is incredibly intrusive
As someone who just converted from Chrome to Firefox 1-2 months ago: what alternative can you recommend to Google Drive? I wouldn't miss everything from it, but being able to easily share data (so that they can play videos, audio files or documents without having to manually download them) is one of them.
EDIT: and maybe Google Photos. Mainly for syncing.
Nextcloud has most, if not all, of the features of drive in my experience.
(Don't everyone hit me) the snap version of nextcloud is dead simple to stand up. But if you are adamantly opposed to snap, the docker version is semi-easy to get going. Or you could just spin up a linode instance with it on there for like $5/mo.
This is all a self-hosted/self-responsible option though. So back it up etc.
Thanks for the idea. I'm mainly looking for storage that I could access even if I blow up my house.
D I T C H
C H R O M E
And stop using chromium browsers too!
No point in ditching chrome just to use chrome with a different coat of paint.
Yep! A few months ago I moved from Brave to Firefox since Brave can’t be trusted
I'm pretty sure the other browsers have to comply too
I'm hosting my own sync servers with bookmarks for firefox, if I don't delete it nobody will.
This feels like a corporation complying with their obligations under the DMCA.
To maintain their safe harbor status, companies have to remove allegedly infringing content in response to a properly filed takedown notice. This does include links stored in google's search results. This is what a company like google has to do when storing user data on servers in any country that signed the WIPO Copyright Treaty.
They don't seem to be doing this in a malicious way. They have done their duty and removed the offending links from their service. But they quite kindly chose to notify the user by email, including the exact URL that was removed. The user can store that link elsewhere.
It would have been far easier to remove the link silently.
See, this is why I like reading comments. Cooler heads prevail. Thank you for the context.
They shouldnt be reading and playing with things privately stored. Are they going to go through all my documents to replace any swear words? It's completely inexcusable. Private doesn't mean private until some big company asks about it wtf.
It's not on bookmarks. Is on collections(a different thing) that are public, shareable and technically hosted by Google. This whole thing has been overblown by not fact checking.
What do you mean by privately stored if you're saving it in some google application?
If that's the case (what OP mentioned), I think it's still the responsibility of who made those effing laws. You cannot ask a corporation to break the law to protect your privacy. But you can definitely ask your representative to protect it
And yet, I can still google torrent sites
Google search really has gone downhill. I'm using fence on my phone and it defaults to duckduckgo. Gotta say, it's just as good, occasionally a little better.
Don't rely on online service to save your stuff.
Edit: how can i exclude < and > from being interpreted?
Usually a backslash (the one under the backspace key, not the one that shares a key with ”?") before a character that would usually be treated as a formatting instruction will stop it from being interpreted as such. Could be different for other machine-interpreted languages but when used this way, the backslash is called an "escape character".
The \ key. And you might ask how I wrote that symbol without it gettting interpreted. Well, by writing \\.
Honestly, the only useful Google service these days is gmail. And that’s only because I don’t want to deal with changing providers after 15 years.
I don't use this (Google Saved?) and I'm unfamiliar with it, is it similar to Pocket?
Is it this: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/9217379
kinda makes sense. it's like if a youtube video or soundcloud track gets DCMA'd then they're going to remove the link.
if it was you actual browser bookmark i would understand the outrage.
im still on FF tho
Isn't removing the bookmarks from people's browser what they're mad about? Now that Google is selling content through YouTube TV, I'll bet they crack down hard on piracy. The old reddit /r/NFLstreams moved to a site a lot of people know. Now that Google owns Sunday ticket, I will not be surprised if it gets DDoS'd to shit this year and becomes borderline unusable. We'll find out next week I guess.
It’s not from the browser. As stated in the article:
Initially, it was suggested that this removal impacted Google’s synched Chrome bookmarks but further research reveals that’s not the case. Instead, the removals apply to Google’s saved feature.
It’s a feature specific to the google app that lets you share collections of bookmarks:
https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/13128452?hl=en
They don’t want people sharing links to pirate sites.
It’s still bad, but saying they are going through bookmarks in chrome and deleting them is misinformation.
I think the word private in "privately saved" should be in quotes, clearly.
Remember kids - firefox was built off the netscape navigator kernel. A download for FF is a vote for the right side of antitrust history (and therefore future)
It's wierd. 4 Days ago I got an email saying they removed a link from my saved websites. Only the link, in the email, was of a reddit post from 8 years ago on how to plug in speakers into a Motherboard I used to have??? How is that piracy? Its on the buildapc subreddit.
it also removed all of my saved places from google maps. thanks i like it
Oh boy, I'm feeling ultra smug now. Been using a Keepass database synced via Syncthing for about 3 years now
Assholes.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
