Thanks. So it appears that most of it is separated, with the exception of web history and search and form data (which can be identifying). This was also interesting:
"Users can log into multiple accounts on the same site, even when the site does not natively support concurrent sessions.
...
Current solutions:
Users open multiple browsers (this takes users away from Firefox).
A user opens one account in Private Browsing mode (this has a limit of 2 accounts, and forces one to be ephemeral)."
There is no mention here of the -no-remote flag which has been available for many years.
How does this compare with using multiple profiles and the -no-remote flag? Does this manage only cookies, or does it also separate local storage (HTML5 session/local/global/web sql database), webcache, window.name caching (if the same tab can use multiple profiles), web history, flash cookies, for those who still have flash installed, etc.
People might get a false sense of security if all of these methods of saving data in the browser are not also separated along with cookies.
An 8% decline is not a "collapse." Also, this could be considered a feature, not a bug, that crops can be produced with less fertilizer, that zinc and iron is still in the soil for the following years. Nutritionists always say that eating a balanced diet provides people with far more of the essential minerals and vitamins than we actually need.
So an alternative headline: "Climate change allows crops to be produced more abundantly and with less fertilizer and added micronutrients, while retaining more than 90% of their nutrients"
When searching in a city for a street name, the search results should not be a ranking that has a street in a city around the world as its first result.
Which is the right reaction, but you can read up on them; what other source of knowledge can we depend on other than that of people articulating their cause and others who substantiate those claims?
Unfortunately, Firefox for example does precious little to impede Google. Everything from search to "safebrowsing" to geolocating to their own forums runs through Google servers. The quote that "Google trackers have been found on 75% of the top million websites" must be a huge underestimate, at least for the top few thousands of websites; it would be surprising if more than 10 of the top 1000 websites did not call some Google server on page load, and most will use 5 or 10 Google services. Here in Canada, it's a very rare government website that does not use Google services (American government sites are actually a little better in this regard). My public library's website (bibliocommons) sends every book I look up to Google.
Efforts like deleting browser cookies, while certainly a good policy, are probably futile in light of all the ways that Google can track and identify browsers; ip address, stored data, fingerprinting (see: panopticlick), canvas fingerprinting, identification through network card timing, etc.
During the past few years, Google has been making a concerted attempt to make website functionality dependent on interaction with Google services: ampproject, googletagservices and googleapis (e.g. jquery) all freqently break websites when browsers block these Google services.
For years now Google has been getting a free pass from governments, the media, and most egregiously, developers, who should know better (nobody else knows what 'HTTP' and 'packet' mean!). This is not to say that Google is evil; they're just a unbelievably huge and powerful corporation that is not accountable to anyone, and knows more about most people in the world than they know about themselves, by most measures, and is rapidly developing technology that will be able to make automated, qualitative judgments of people based on this knowledge.
Here's another person looking for an open source OS on mobile phones. Is 1%/30 million users(?) really not enough? All I would like is the ability to make calls, write texts, and perhaps use data occasionally without a multinational corp logging my every packet for eternity/when AI can use it.
"Users can log into multiple accounts on the same site, even when the site does not natively support concurrent sessions. ... Current solutions: Users open multiple browsers (this takes users away from Firefox). A user opens one account in Private Browsing mode (this has a limit of 2 accounts, and forces one to be ephemeral)."
There is no mention here of the -no-remote flag which has been available for many years.