In addition to allowing Google to manage the authentication process, signing in with Google allows Google to track your visits. In some cases they get additional data about content you view.

In many cases the mere presence of that button allows Google to track that your device visited the Udemy sign in/sign up page, even if you don’t click it. Google uses this to create and update a profile of you they sell for advertising and other purposes, and exposes you to more risk if your Google account is breached. With a password manager I find using SSO to be about the same level of effort as using my manager’s autofill functionality

That depends on where you live. Most places in the US, yes it is legal. It’s legal to keep almost any data for any reason in most of the US

It’s impossible to do without signing the with the valid cert. I think destroying the anonymity is the point

No you’re right. The ARF just ignored that constraint and intentionally built in a back door here. From the linked article:

However, the current ARF stipulates that law enforcement authorities can retroactively trace pseudonyms back to their legal identity. The provisions therefore „strongly contradicts the legal requirements,“ epicenter.works writes.

If they are checking data brokers or aggregators it’s not really a background check. Carefully read any consent you give for a potential employer to perform a background check. Look for the records they are accessing and make a determination based on that language.

It is possible that some vendor is the space incorporates data brokers into their service, and that’s hard to tell. But they still should ask for your consent, I believe.

No need to apologize haha! You were giving good advice and didn’t do anything funny. It’s just tech names that are funny. I appreciate your attitude fwiw and your English is better than mine, so it not being your first language is not apparent at all

No no, I’m not laughing at you. It’s the names of the services that are cracking me up. You didn’t do anything

I know those are all real but this sentence is objectively hilarious

Most gym employees don’t have that level of discretion in the US at least. Most gyms I’m aware of are franchises and asking a wage employee to go against their corporate policies risks their livelihood.

Ah I missed the part where you said “and charge you.” There’s nothing in contracts like these that says the gym has to let you identify yourself in any way you choose and I don’t see why you think there would be.

I never said they’d charge you, I said they wouldn’t just let you in.

Yes that’s absolutely what will happen. They likely have language in the contract you signed allowing them to do just that.

You are paying for access to the gym. They don’t have to provide you access via a card or a list or an app - they probably specify that they can refuse access for a variety of reasons, including “safety and privacy” or some shit they can shoehorn an app into. You don’t have a legal right to access a place via the mechanism you choose.

That isn’t how contracts work

And they will say you can’t go to the gym, then. I agree this is enshittification but this isn’t a magic trick that lets you bypass the app

It is apparently used for emergency location https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/746-imsservice-system-app-accesses-location-consistently

That’s a choice they can make for themselves, not a choice tech companies and governments should make for everyone. If they want to trade their privacy, and I don’t - fine. All I want is the power to choose and know that choice will be respected.

Ok but that isn’t the most common reason for url params

Rants are rants, that’s fine imo

Oh god could you imagine? Combinatorial explosion

That’s just how http requests work though. It’s not their code it’s…the internet

Most things you share will be static. These are things like news articles and webcomics where the output of the page is always the same no matter what you do. Things like google searches or YouTube links that are different depending on some way you interact with the site are dynamic. If you search for “apples” in google you’ll get different results than if you search for “oranges.” If you share the apple search with someone, your apple text will be coded as a parameter after the ?. If you strip that off they’d go to google.com and not see any apples. Trackers and other surveillance tools are also captured in the query params so for dynamic content it can be tricky to know which params to remove and which to keep. For static content you can just remove them all because the content doesn’t change based on the params you pass it

This may work for sharing links to static content, but it is terrible advice for anything interactive. That removes all URL params and will break lots of interactive sites.

It’s ok children can’t consent so anything a parent decides must be ok \s

You’re right, of course. The end result of capitalism is necessarily feudalism - capitalism doesn’t make universally efficient markets. It makes markets that are efficient for the winners. I should have said technology companies and not technology as a whole

Technology creates fiefdoms where rentiers extract value from the rest of us. But I’m not losing hope