Relatively little of what teens do is going to cause them problems in later life. It's what people do between about 18 and 25 that tends to screw them. Mainly because they're old enough to drink (without having to hide it) but not yet old enough to think (well).
Whatever you do you are still being tracked by default, that is the point of Chrome.
Do you have any evidence to back that claim up?
There are a number of features in Chrome that optionally talk to Google. But you can change them all if you prefer. Do you have any proof that it "phones home" in any hidden way? It should be quite easy to prove; Wireshark is all you need.
I don't think "better tracking of users" has ever been a goal, stated or unstated, of the Chrome project. And, seriously, why would it? It's not like the normal web standards don't offer everything that's required for whatever tracking anyone would like to do.
Get better content, do better at troll control and get more of us to subscribe.
Why are you a cheap jerk and not paying a subscription? http://slashdot.org/subscribe....
/but not as friends... because of reasons.
Veteran IT Journalist Worries That Online Privacy May Not Exist
As if there was any doubt?
One can only hope that things will get better.
Trial and error, I expect. Look at what other sites do. I realize that this isn't a very good answer. There isn't a good answer, just bad answers that are still better than passwords. Classic OpenID isn't the answer because users don't know how to use it and many RPs don't trust random providers. But as a practical matter providing login with, say, Google, Facebook, Yahoo and AOL will give better than 95% of your users the ability to log on with better security than the password-based model you'd build, and do it just by clicking a couple of buttons.
If you find that your user base tends to have an account with some other provider (no, I can't tell you how to find out who your users are or what they use), then add that.
I also expect that they spent as little as possible on making the computer-side of the device and didn't even consider the digital security aspects of their choices. Pretty stupid for a security company, but it wouldn't be the first time that such decisions have been made.
As usual, I prefer to blame the victims (us).
On a desktop personal computer, it would never occur to you to think "Oh, I just assume I'll get software maintenance from my ISP," and if anyone ever actually said that then you would point your finger at them and laugh and their over-the-top stupidity.
But change the form factor of the personal computer to handheld and suddenly we don't do the pointing and laughing. On the very face of it, it's JUST AS STUPID. So WTF?
Users are not exercising their common sense. They simply aren't. You can make excuses for not using common sense and explain why we did this very obviously stupid thing, but don't pretend it's not happening. Every morning you're getting up and putting a "kick me" sign on your back. You know that you're doing it and you know what consequences will invariably flow from it.
"I don't have any other signs to put on my back! All the signs on the market say 'kick me!'"
"Just because I wear a 'kick me' sign that doesn't mean anyone really has license to kick me! They shouldn't be doing that to me!"
Ok, go on and say those things. You even have some valid points, and the things you're saying might even be technically correct. But that doesn't mean you don't sound stupid, because you don't have not getting kicked in your requirements! WTF, people?!
Stop thinking of handhelds as some weird special case where ALL your experiences with software maintenance magically don't apply! THAT'S STUPID! So yeah, I'm a victim-blamer. You know when you buy your PC from your ISP or from a manufacturer who has a history of preventing maintenance, what's going to happen. And when people pretend they don't know the invariable consequences of buying PCs from ISPs, the stupidity takes on a flavor of dishonesty. Mmmm, yum!
I want storage expansion and dual-SIM. I wouldn't mind front-mounted speakers. I actually want a real, physical keyboard but I know that's simply not in the cards. I want about double the battery capacity compared to most phones, with a removable battery. I want the LTE bands for my carrier in my area to all be supported. I want a camera capable of about 5MP pictures as I have a real camera that I use when I want ultra high quality photos.
It's really the removal of the memory expansion that upsets me. They're doing it to force consumers to buy new phones in a couple of years instead of simply adding more torage capacity to their existing phones.
FPGA can also have backdoors.