What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
101 Comments
- inactive, on 09/02/2008, -12/+51I don't Care if Google get more information about me, they already know everything I search for.
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -6/+40I prefer Firefox because it is more neutral than IE and Crome, in other words: there is no hidden agenda.
Please FF is just awesome and keeps getting better with every version. - FuzzyCat, on 09/03/2008, -3/+2711. Content license from you
11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services. - norman619, on 09/03/2008, -1/+23I wonder how many people have bothered to read the EULA. Why they feel they need to own that information is a mystery to me. My comments here on diggg and elsewhere are mine. They can do what they like with the information but to try and lay claim to is a little disturbing to me.
- stutimandal, on 09/03/2008, -3/+25Chrome is nice from a get-job-done/resource point of view, but the EULA agreement sucks. They even want your "comments at Digg" (or other websites) under their ownership -- which basically means they have a sniffer which will sniff any comment and report it to google before submitting it.
I don't think Google knows that much about me just based on my Google search history as Yuokool12 suggests. - inactive, on 09/03/2008, -7/+26Well, unless someone makes an adblocker addon for it real quick, they aren't going to get me..
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -2/+18Guess what? It's open source!
If Chrome were spying on you, it would be there in the source code. - HarChim, on 09/03/2008, -8/+23Yea, I agree. I don't really see what they can do with all that info besides throw better ads at me which wouldn't be that bad.
- OhFrak, on 09/03/2008, -3/+16Here's the complete source to Chrome:
http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/archives/chromi ...
Anyone who is making the claim that Chrome is doing anything sinister should be able to easily point out where in the code. - JorgeGT, on 09/03/2008, -0/+11It's open source!! Can someone compile the source code into an executable installer? That way we can get rid of the eula. The souce code is here: http://code.google.com/chromium/ but I don't have visual studio.
- Warpling, on 09/03/2008, -7/+17"Do no evil"
I'm still scared… - shaheerk, on 09/03/2008, -1/+9Uhh.... I think that license agreement part is for their websites only. Note the capitalization of "services" - that's clearly Google Services.
Chrome's cool. It's just an infant; give it some time. But I'll say it's a good alternative to Firefox at this stage.
I just noted this text box is bouncing like crazy as I type. Submit bug report... - JasonCox, on 09/03/2008, -2/+9I'm kinda scared here; the Google fanboys are actually burying the Firefox fanboys.
- BoneheadFarker, on 09/03/2008, -2/+9And the Internet Tough Guy shows up on cue...
- chrisemc, on 09/03/2008, -0/+6The scary thing is that it was stated yesterday that at some point in the future Google envisions Chrome and Firefox coalescing into one very similar offering. Which at face value sounds cool, but to those people on this thread worried about their privacy concerns, not so much.
There's a war coming, and it's for your (seemingly innocuous) web footprint. - warriorscot, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4Ive been using it since it came out and I really like it, the more I use it the more little things I find that I like. I Love the UI it has exactly what I need and nothing more, the way it handles tabs is just brilliant and its blazing fast and unlike FF hasn't had a single slow down on my work computer all day.
The lack of a proper adblocking is annoying for some sites but it blocks pop ups at least. And it is open source there is absolutely no reason I can see that someone can't modify Chrome to be a little more privacy orientated with a built in adblocker. If they added in an adblocker I don't think I would ever use anything other than chrome again normally.
Although this text box just started bouncing like mad, it was working fine earlier though. - OhFrak, on 09/03/2008, -2/+6http://www.admuncher.com/
Works perfectly with Chrome while waiting for AdBlock. - ww917352, on 09/03/2008, -1/+5I think the big problem here is the following: Yes, Google promised not to be evil so they may just use your information to better advertise. However, that is only a promise and who knows what actually happens with your data? Even Google acts as an angel, it is still dangerous when your data accidentally slipped out of Google's hands (to hackers or cyber criminals) and misused against you. Also, what if Google is ordered by courts or govenmental agents to hand over user data? Once data is collected, you have little control whether the data will be abused.
- maninalift, on 09/03/2008, -1/+5OK...
1.1 Your use of Google’s products, software, services and websites (referred to collectively as the “Services” in this document
11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights that you already hold in Content that you submit, post or display on or through the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content, you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content that you submit, post or display on or through the Services....
_BUT_ 11.1 continues to say:
This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services. - stubear, on 09/03/2008, -4/+8This is where it begins. Do you know where it's going to end? I sure don't and neither do you. Google has already demonstrated their willingness to work with governments to oppress their own people, why shouldn't they sell or give away your information should they be asked? It starts with the real criminals, who cares if Google shares their information, they deserve to go to jail, right?
- danandre, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4I don't see how even Google is capable of storing or even logging ALL content produced by its users. I'm guessing they use the content to generate a profile of the user. Profile is used to make targeted ads.
- OhFrak, on 09/03/2008, -2/+5That has nothing to do with Chrome itself, it is in regards to Google Services like YouTube.
- cchris81, on 09/03/2008, -3/+6No Adblock.... Thats the deal breaker for me.. I've always had it running and now i can't beleive how clustered all the sites I go to are.
- jeffsback2223, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3I'm not going to say anything bad about Chrome. I'm just going to say that I'm comfortable using Firefox, since I spent a good deal of time customizing to my needs.
- Karmavs, on 09/03/2008, -1/+4The EULA is the same as all their other EULAs, and makes references that really make no sense in a browser EULA. I wouldn’t worry about it.
- haterofps3, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3Well I can think of a reason why but whether or not it is correct is another issue.
1. A browser displays content and as such can display copyrighted information so as a medium it possibly has to have permission from the copyrighter before it can display it. I would imagine that this is there more to protect Google and less about Google owning everything. - ChayesFSS, on 09/03/2008, -5/+8meh, I can't really see what more I get from moving away from FF
- maninalift, on 09/03/2008, -1/+4_WHERE_ in the EULA does it say this?
- NoDitchDigging, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3Being an advertising company as well as search, I can't see Google being too happy about allowing ad blocking software on their new browser. I have noticed at least one tech forum I've visited has expressly forbidden discussion of such software since it would cut into the site's ad revenues, and I can see Google definitely taking a similar stance - particularly since the browser has features built into it for detecting and removing software it doesn't like. Call it "anti-malware" but it can be used to remove anything that Google blacklists.
- MDIT, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3How long till they open up a plugin directory?
- ScrewedThePooch, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Why does that cow have horns AND utters?
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3I'm scared too... Hold me.
- maninalift, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3agreed ...it's something Google should probably make clearer though
- BellaG, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3I agree - FF has everything I need in a browser - and all the add on's make things a lot easier!
Not sure if you can have add on's on Chrome too? - sirjoebob, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3translation: clsslc advocates not using the internet....
- Kyrgizion, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Just makes me wish I had sold everything I owned and purchased google stock when they were first hitting it off with nothing more than a search engine.
- dazparkour, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Shhh. Put the reason back in the box.
- MacParrot, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3"..welcome to google...i love you.....welcome to google....i love you....welcome to google....i love you..."
Now replace all the times you said Google with FireFox. That's basically what you're saying. Choice is a good thing and no one is being forced to use Chrome. - MacParrot, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3"Google is CLEARLY turning into another Micro$oft (which is SAD...I used to really like google back in the day)."
You mean their going to integrate their browser into your OS and not allow you to remove it without damage? Or maybe you mean they'll force OEMs to bundle it whether or not they actually want it and make them pay for it on each machine sold?
Dude, even Microsoft isn't like that anymore. It's a browser. It integrates with Google services. You can either use it or not. If you decide not to, all the services you CHOOSE to use from Google will still work with FireFox, IE, Safari, Opera, or (name your browser of choice here).
As far as leaving all browser coding up to Mozilla, are you saying that only one browser should be available? That no one should have the choice to use say Safari or (if that's their preference) IE? - kozEfx, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3How is this not a service OhFrak? Chrome seems to be providing "Services": connecting to WWW sites. Is there a legal definition as to what "Services" are? Does that definition not include "browsers"?
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Is it time to put this silly catchphrase to bed now? It stopped being true and even mockable some time ago.
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Speed, on a whole new magnitude.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10030888-92.html? ...
Especially for Javascript/ECMAScript ("Ajax") applications, which are only getting bigger and better.
It's simpler but there's also more control. For instance, all pages and their scripts are run in separate processes or threads (not sure which technically), so that if one application freezes it won't lock up the entire browser. And, you can summon a "Task Manager" to kill individual processes. - inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2"Deal-breaker"? Wouldn't you like to wait until the product matures out of beta before making such a strong and final analysis? Nobody it touting this as a finished product just yet.
It's open-source: my money's on smart code-monkeys eventually writing Ad-blocking plug-ins/extensions etc for it, just as good as those revered in Fx. - JorgeGT, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Surprisingly enough, it has a built-in code inspector, far from firebug, yes, but handy.
- ScrewedThePooch, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2"As far as leaving all browser coding up to Mozilla, are you saying that only one browser should be available? That no one should have the choice to use say Safari or (if that's their preference) IE?"
I agree, but no one should use IE....ever. - Giever, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Actually, it's "Don't be evil," everyone thinks it's, "Do no evil," cause of those monkeys.
- ScrewedThePooch, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1ROFL! Dugg for Idiocracy plug.
- MWeather, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1That has nothing to do with Chrome itself, it is in regards to Google Services like YouTube.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 103 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is