2021 Google News

Speed and reliability are two major factors that consumers consider when choosing an internet service. A new study by Highspeedinternet.com, a firm that tracks the pros and cons of internet service providers (ISPs), has rated the major services on their speed.

The study found that Google Fiber is the undisputed leader. It boasts an average download speed of 160 Mbps and advertises a maximum speed of 2000 Mbps. There’s just one problem -- it has limited availability in the U.S. Where it is available, it costs between $70 and $100 per month.

Xfinity is the most widely available internet service, according to the study. It has an average download speed of 131.6 Mbps and advertises a maximum speed of 2,000 Mbps. It has a wide range of plans, but they all have data caps. It costs between $24 and just under $300 a month.

Verizon Fios offers the most widespread U.S. coverage when it comes to fiber-optic connections. Fios’ average download speed clocked in at 138 Mbps and advertises speeds up to 940 Mbps. It costs between $25 and $300 a month.

Metronet also makes the list of the five fastest internet services. It has an average download speed of 135.2 Mbps with a maximum advertised speed of 1,000 Mbps. Its 200 Mbps plan costs right at $50 a month and has no data caps.

Metronet is popular with ConsumerAffairs reviewers, earning 4.2 out of 5 stars. Jacob, of Greenwood, Ind., is a fan.

“MetroNet’s speed is second to none and I haven't had an issue with the service,” he wrote in a ConsumerAffairs post. “It’s been great dealing with the reps.”

Cox Internet also gets attention for its speed. Its average download speed is 134.5 Mbps, with a maximum advertised speed of 940 Mbps. Its base package starts at around $30 a month.

Customer satisfaction

But speed isn’t the only thing that makes users happy. Highspeedinternet.com’s customer satisfaction survey, released last month, ranked Earthlink, AT&T, and Verizon as the top three ISPs in terms of customer satisfaction.

While Earthlink gets its share of five-star reviews from ConsumerAffairs reviewers, it actually places behind the other companies in the study. Here’s how ConsumerAffairs reviews and ratings rank the five ISPs.

1. Google Fiber: 4.0 stars out of 5

2. Verizon Fios: 3.9 stars out of 5

3. Xfinity: 3.8 stars out of 5

4. AT&T: 3.8 stars out of 5

5. Earthlink: 3.7 stars out of 5

The study also found that bundling internet services with other media and communication services is popular with consumers. Fifty-eight percent of internet users said they bundle their internet with TV service from the same provider, and they tended to have higher rates of satisfaction than those who buy their services separately.

A new report suggests that Google employees could actually lose money by continuing to work remotely.

According to an internal salary calculator seen by Reuters and others, a Google employee could possibly face a 25% pay cut if they opt to work from home permanently. During the pandemic’s heyday, Google paid staffers who worked remotely less than others based on how much it costs to live in their area. But this move has the earmarks of a shift rather than a wrinkle because it could reportedly affect workers without them changing their physical address.

"It's as high of a pay cut as I got for my most recent promotion,” one Google employee told Reuters. “I didn't do all that hard work to get promoted to then take a pay cut.”

A Connecticut-based employee who lives an hour away from their Google office in New York shared a screenshot of the calculator with Reuters, and it showed a 15% cut if the person works from home. Conversely, a Google employee who lives in New York City or San Francisco would see no cut. 

An experiment?

Reuters framed the move as an “experiment” -- one being incubated in Silicon Valley. The area is not only the home of many Big Tech companies but also the place where trends like this get their start. 

Google isn’t alone in this either. More companies are likely facing the same dilemma as they give employees the option to work remotely. Both Facebook and Twitter also cut pay for remote employees who move to less expensive, more cost-effective areas. 

On the flip side, smaller companies including Reddit, Wildbit, and Zillow have shifted to a location-agnostic pay structure -- meaning employees will be paid consistently regardless of where they live. The companies cite advantages like retention and diversity, and they say employees feel more respected.

A Google spokesperson defended the company’s position, saying the way the company compensates its workers is consistent with what it has always done.

"Our compensation packages have always been determined by location, and we always pay at the top of the local market based on where an employee works from,” they said.

As part of an update to its Play Store policies, Google will be banning so-called “sugar dating” apps. Beginning September 1, the company will no longer allow apps that focus on "compensated sexual relationships (i.e., sugar dating)” to exist on its Android app marketplace. 

“Sugar dating” is typically when a wealthy older individual agrees to provide financial assistance to someone -- usually a young female -- in exchange for a sexual relationship. 

Apps focused on facilitating these connections are popular, with many of them garnering over a million installations. Some have names that strongly suggest their intent, like “Sugar Daddy,” while others have more vague names like Elite Millionaire Singles, SeekingArrangement, and Spoil.

Google is cracking down on these types of apps under an update to its sexual content policy. Starting in September, Android users will no longer be able to download sugar dating apps from the Google Play store. 

Google’s updated policy, as reported by Android Police, states that it’s “updating the Inappropriate Content policy to institute new restrictions on sexual content, specifically prohibiting compensated sexual relationships (i.e. sugar dating).” 

The tech giant’s Play Store policies already prohibit apps that promote “services that may be interpreted as providing sexual acts in exchange for compensation.” The policy change announced Wednesday expands the definition to clearly state that it will not allow apps that center on the concept of a compensated sexual relationship “where one participant is expected or implied to provide money, gifts or financial support to another participant (‘sugar dating’).”

Google has updated its “about this result” feature in Search and will now provide context about how and why a particular result was retrieved. 

The “about this result” information box was added earlier this year to make it easier for users to vet sources they aren’t familiar with and provide additional “peace of mind” when searching. Now, Google wants to give users a little more insight into how its algorithm works so they can get the most out of the search engine. 

“When you search for information on Google, you’re probably accustomed to seeing a lot of relevant results in a fraction of a second,” the company said. “But maybe you’ve found yourself wondering how Google connected those results to the words you typed, especially if you didn’t get exactly what you were expecting to find.” 

Learning more about search results

In offering more insight into how its algorithm works, Google is aiming to help users make better searches in the future. 

“Starting today, when you visit an About This Result panel — the three dots next to most results — you’ll get even more information about your results to help you make sense of the information and figure out which result will be most useful,” the company explained.

The company is now giving users information on how it links search terms to specific sites. For example, the tech giant said a search for “how to cook fish in the oven” would lead to a recipe from a site that included the words “how, cook, fish, and oven” and were associated with other terms like “ingredients” and “recipe.” The algorithm also relies on matching language and applying relevant geographic locations. 

The feature is available to users searching for English language results starting today. Google said it hopes to expand availability in the coming months. 

Europe hasn’t been kind to U.S. tech companies lately -- especially Google. On the heels of the U.K.’s decision to investigate the company over failure to remove fake product reviews and the European Union going after it for abusing its ad tech power, France has now handed Google a fine of €500 million ($590,740 U.S.) over bad faith negotiations with news outlets.

In a decision announced on Tuesday, the French Competition Authority (FCA) imposed the fine on Google for essentially failing to comply with injunctions imposed in 2020. Those measures called for the company to work with publishers and press agencies to develop a new partnership called Publisher Curated News, which included a new service called Showcase.

The intent of the partnership was to create an interchange with news publishers where they would control their content and be paid for its reuse in places like Google News.

Deliberate non-compliance

The FCA takes competition seriously. The agency said Google’s failure to comply with the injunctions is a serious issue.

“Google's behavior is the result of a deliberate, elaborate and systematic strategy of non-compliance,” the FCA wrote in its announcement of the fine, (translated from French to English by Google Translate). “And [it] appears as the continuation of the opposition strategy of Google, put in place for several years, to oppose the principle even related rights during the discussion of the directive on related rights, then to minimize its concrete scope as much as possible.”

French regulators are also concerned that Google’s attempts to appease them were tucked into a global strategy that was “aimed at avoiding or limiting as much as possible payment of remuneration to [France-based] publishers.” 

Fix this or pay the price

France is giving Google two months to address the issue by offering payments for the use of “protected content” to publishers. After that, the FCA said the company is looking at an additional €900,000 ($1 million) per day in penalties.

Google was a bit defensive in its response, saying the fine ignores the work that the company has done so far and how its platform handles news content. The company also said it generated “less than 5 million Euros in revenue-not-profit from clicks on ads against possible news-related queries in France.”

“We want to find a solution and reach definitive agreements but this fine is out of all proportion to the amount of money we make from news and we will be reviewing the decision in detail,” Google stated.

Just a week after a federal judge dismissed an antitrust suit against Facebook, 37 state attorneys general are suing Google on similar grounds as part of a campaign by state and federal officials to break up “Big Tech.”

The states, led by both Republicans and Democrats, have filed an action against Google parent company Alphabet, claiming its Google Play Store constitutes “illegal and anticompetitive conduct” that gives it monopoly power in mobile app distribution.

The suit charges Google of depriving Android device users of the kind of competition that could lead to greater choice and innovation, as well as significantly lower prices for mobile apps. New York Attorney General Letitia James also accuses Google of requiring app developers to sell in-app digital content through apps purchased via Google’s Play Store.

“Google has served as the gatekeeper of the internet for many years, but, more recently, it has also become the gatekeeper of our digital devices, resulting in all of us paying more for the software we use every day,” James said. “Once again, we are seeing Google use its dominance to illegally quash competition and profit to the tune of billions.”

The complaint charges Google of forcing millions of Android users to turn to it as the only source for mobile apps. At the same time, the suit claims Google is using its dominance to keep smaller firms from competing.

“Google’s monopoly is a menace to the marketplace,” said Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes, another of the coalition’s leaders. “Google Play is not fair play. Google must be held accountable for harming small businesses and consumers.”

Google’s response

In response to the complaint, Google officials said the suit made little sense.

“It’s strange that a group of state attorneys general chose to file a lawsuit attacking a system that provides more openness and choice than others,” said Wilson White, Google’s senior director of public policy.

Last fall 38 attorneys general sued Google on antitrust grounds, claiming that it holds monopolistic power in search results. While officials want to reduce the size and power of large technology companies, they must make the case that their size and power have harmed consumers.

In dismissing the two antitrust suits against Facebook last week, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said the states and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) failed to make their case that the social media giant is a monopoly.

Reyes claimed that Google has harmed consumers by imposing “unnecessary fees” beyond the market rates for in-app transactions, thus raising prices for many services.

“As a result, a typical American consumer may have paid hundreds if not thousands of dollars more than needed over many years,” he said. “Utah and the other states in our coalition are fighting back to protect our citizens and innovative app developers—including many small businesses across America—from Google’s unlawful practices.”

Facebook, Google, TikTok, and Twitter have pledged to build solutions that will help combat online abuse and improve women’s safety on their respective platforms. 

During the UN Generation Equality Forum in Paris, the four tech giants agreed to sign onto a pledge led by the World Wide Web Foundation (WWWF). The initiative was created to fix flaws that make it more likely for women, and people who identify as women, to have negative experiences online.

The pledge aims to give women more control over who can interact with them online, as well as a better system for reporting abuse. In developing the initiative, the WWWF worked with more than 100 experts from tech companies, governments, and civil society. Women affected by online abuse were also directly involved in the process. 

More than a third of women experience abuse

The Foundation said 38% of women have experienced online abuse. Among Gen Z and millennial women, the figure is higher at 45%. The group found that worse abuse is often experienced among women of color and those in LGBTQIA+ and other marginalized communities.

“For too long, women have been routinely harassed, attacked and subsequently silenced in online spaces. This is a huge threat to progress on gender equality,” said Azmina Dhrodia, WWWF’s senior policy manager. 

In a letter, the WWWF said online platforms are currently falling short in protecting women. 

"Rather than a one-size-fits-all experience, women should have more control over who can interact with them on tech platforms, as well as more choice over what, when, and how they see content online. Current tools need to be improved so women can easily report abuse and track the progress of these reports,” the letter stated.

“For example, dashboards that show users the status of all their reports in one place, features to guide them through the reporting process, and tools that offer women access to additional support when it's needed, could make a huge difference.”

Settings to curate safety

The tech companies agreed and have promised to introduce settings to help tackle abuse. They will focus on two key areas: offering more control over who can see, comment on, reply to, or share posts; and offering simple and reliable reporting systems for flagging online abuse. 

The companies also promised to enable “greater capacity to address context and/or language" and to provide “more policy and product guidance when reporting abuse."

“With their resources and reach, these four companies have the power to curb this abuse and improve online experiences for hundreds of millions of women and girls,” Dhrodia said. The commitments the companies have made “should be celebrated as a major win and act as a springboard for companies to tackle abuse against women as a top priority.”

Google has been served with another antitrust allegation by the European Union (EU). 

Just two years ago, EU regulators opened a probe into how Google handled user data. Now, it is alleging that Google abuses its power as the leader in the online advertising segment. By all indications, it will be the most sweeping investigation yet into that sector of the company.

The EU is focusing primarily on whether Google favors its own online display advertising technology services over offerings from other companies.

Antitrust investigations into U.S. companies are becoming old hat for the EU. It’s already gone after Apple for breaking antitrust rules and unfair dominance with its App Store policies. Amazon was also put under scrutiny for antitrust violations over how it uses its Marketplace data.

Creating a level playing field

The most recent Google investigation will take a hard look at whether the company is distorting competition by restricting third-party access to user data for advertising purposes on websites and mobile apps while reserving that data for its own purposes. Google currently has a distinct advantage in this competitive space because it provides advertising technology services that work as a hand-off between advertisers and publishers in order to display ads on websites or mobile apps.

“Online advertising services are at the heart of how Google and publishers monetise their online services. Google collects data to be used for targeted advertising purposes, it sells advertising space and also acts as an online advertising intermediary. So Google is present at almost all levels of the supply chain for online display advertising,” explained European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager, who is in charge of competition policy.

Vestager said what’s important is that there’s a level playing field that affords every company the same opportunities.

“Fair competition is important -- both for advertisers to reach consumers on publishers' sites and for publishers to sell their space to advertisers, to generate revenues and funding for content. We will also be looking at Google's policies on user tracking to make sure they are in line with fair competition,“ she said.

The digital world’s king of the hill has decided it will alter its global advertising business to keep from abusing its dominance.

In a landmark deal struck with French authorities, Google has finally moved its position after facing pressure from regulators over antitrust concerns. The agreement the company made with a French competition watchdog, which includes a settlement of 220 million euros ($268.2 million), is designed to reset the advertising playing field and give publishers a more advantageous position.

“The decision to sanction Google is of particular significance because it’s the first decision in the world focusing on the complex algorithmic auction processes on which the online ad business relies,” said Isabelle de Silva, President of the French Competition Authority.

Where Google went wrong

Google drew the ire of French regulators because its Ad Manager platform provided its ad exchange network, Google AdX, with inside information on bidding prices for ads. That essentially handed Google all the data it needed to remain competitive.

The French authority said AdX also gained privileged access to requests made by advertisers via Google's ad services. That access created concerns that Google would have too much control over online advertising when it bought AdX.

What changes will we see?

The primary change Google has agreed to make will give publishers a more advantageous position. Going forward, the company agreed to upgrade the way its Ad Manager services worked with competitors.

However, consumers, advertisers, and publishers won’t see these changes overnight. Even though Google won’t be appealing the legal decision, it has until the first quarter of 2022 before it needs to have some of the pieces of the agreement in place.

French finance minister Bruno Le Maire welcomed the move, saying “these are serious practices and they have been rightly sanctioned.”

Will other dominoes fall?

News of Google’s acquiescence might be today’s biggest watercooler topic in Silicon Valley. Executives at Apple and Facebook might be giving a second thought to being defiant over their own antitrust allegations. 

Just last week, Facebook was hit with two new investigations in the U.K. and Europe, with regulators planning to take a closer look at whether Facebook Marketplace and Facebook Dating have an unfair advantage over competitors.

A battle royale is brewing between Roku and Google. On Monday, Roku sent out an email to its 50+ million users saying that Google may take away their access to the YouTube TV channel on Roku.

A Roku spokesperson told ConsumerAffairs there are three key issues that the platform is wrestling with: 

• Google’s request that Roku manipulate consumer search.

• What Roku calls discriminatory tactics levied by Google exclusively against Roku.

• An attempt to tie other aspects of the Google monopoly together such as leveraging the negotiations Roku and Google are holding that could make Google’s own hardware more price-competitive by threatening to remove the much bigger YouTube app. The Roku spokesperson told ConsumerAffairs that this point is not up for negotiation at this time. 

Roku says it’s standing up for its customers

In its email to subscribers, Roku hammered home that the platform is sticking to its guns to ensure “a great streaming experience at an exceptional value.” 

“We will always stand up for our users, which is why we cannot accept Google's unfair and anticompetitive requirements to manipulate your search results, impact the usage of your data and ultimately cost you more,” the company stated.

When ConsumerAffairs contacted Roku, its spokesperson wasted no time in taking off the gloves. They said Google was attempting to force Roku into accepting predatory, anti-competitive, and discriminatory terms that will directly impact Roku’s users. 

“Given antitrust suits against Google, investigations by competition authorities of anti-competitive behavior and Congressional hearings into Google’s practices, it should come as no surprise that Google is now demanding unfair and anti-competitive terms that harm Roku’s users,” the spokesperson said.

Google fires back

The fight turned even uglier when ConsumerAffairs contacted Google for its side of the argument.

Google called out Roku for making inaccurate public claims, but the company said that it wasn’t really surprised by Roku’s ploy to go public to raise the specter of negotiations. Google pointed out two recent examples of that -- one with WarnerMedia and another negotiation with NBC’s Peacock. Roku wasn’t alone in its stand-off with Peacock; Amazon also played hardball for the sake of its Fire TV service.

“We have been working with Roku in good faith to reach an agreement that benefits our viewers and their customers. Unfortunately, Roku often engages in these types of tactics in their negotiations. We’re disappointed that they chose to make baseless claims while we continue our ongoing negotiations,” a Google spokesperson told ConsumerAffairs.

“All of our work with them has been focused on ensuring a high quality and consistent experience for our viewers. We have made no requests to access user data or interfere with search results.”

What consumers can expect as an end result

At the end of this bout, it’s likely that both sides will find a way to work things out, call it a draw, and lay down their swords for the sake of the consumer. Neither side would say much more than it’s working in good faith to reach an equitable agreement that benefits its users.

“We believe consumers stand to benefit from Google and Roku reaching a fair agreement that preserves consumers access to YouTube TV, protects user data and promotes a competitive, free and open marketplace. We are committed to trying to achieve that goal,” Roku said. 

Google was on the same page, saying that it hopes the two sides “can resolve this for the sake of our mutual users.”

Australia’s federal court has ruled that Google misled consumers about location data settings on Android mobile devices between 2017 and 2018. 

On Friday, the country’s Competition and Consumer Commission found that Google improperly led consumers to believe that it could only collect personal data if users had “location history” settings turned on. The ACCC found that Google could still collect, store, and use consumers location data if the setting for “web and application activity” was on. 

“When consumers created a new Google Account during the initial set-up process of their Android device, Google misrepresented that the ‘Location History’ setting was the only Google Account setting that affected whether Google collected, kept or used personally identifiable data about their location,” the court said. 

Online privacy victory

The regulator said the ruling was an “important victory for consumers” -- especially those who are concerned about their digital privacy. The court said its decision “sends a strong message to Google and others that big businesses must not mislead their customers.” 

In addition to fining Google an undisclosed sum, the ACCC said it will be “seeking an order for Google to publish a notice to Australian consumers to better explain Google’s location data settings in the future.” In a statement, Google said it disagreed with many of the court’s claims and that it is considering appealing. 

“We disagree with the remaining findings and are currently reviewing our options, including a possible appeal,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement.

The tech giant noted that it has “robust controls for location data,” including a recently introduced “auto delete” feature for Location History and an incognito mode in its Maps product. 

Users of Google’s Sheets, Docs, and Slides applications started reporting that they were unable to open new documents this morning at around 9 a.m. When trying to open a new document, users have encountered the following message: 

“Google Docs encountered an error. Please try reloading this page, or coming back to it in a few minutes. To learn more about the Google Docs editors, please visit our help center. We’re sorry for the inconvenience.” 

Google has acknowledged the service disruptions and said it’s currently investigating the glitch. 

“The affected users are able to access Google Drive, but are seeing error messages, high latency, and/or other unexpected behavior,” the company said in an update. “Affected users are unable to create new documents.”

Happening for users worldwide

The error message also appears to be popping up for users outside of the U.S. Users in Europe and India have reported being unable to create new documents, as well. 

Apart from the update on its Status Dashboard, Google has not issued an official statement explaining why the outage has occurred or when it will be fixed. ConsumerAffairs will provide updates on this story as it develops.

---

Update: As of 12:20 p.m. (EST), Google says that problem with Google Drive has been resolved. Consumers who are still having issues with Google's applications are being advised to reload pages if necessary.

The U.S. Supreme Court took Google’s side in an exhaustive, 11-year copyright case against Oracle on Monday. The two tech giants were feuding over software used on the Android platform. 

Oracle claimed that Google unfairly used 11,500 lines of code it considered copyrighted. The company wanted $9 billion in compensation for Google using that code, but the tech giant pushed back and said its use of the code was covered under the fair use doctrine.

Fair use vs. copyright protection

Deciding which company was correct in its assessment has bounced all over the place. After a jury agreed with Google on the fair use defense, a Federal Circuit reversed that decision, concluding that Google’s copying was not a fair use as a matter of law. This most recent ruling that once again went in Google’s favor will no doubt have great implications for software developers down the road. 

“The long settled practice of reusing software interfaces is critical to modern software development,” Tom Goldstein, Google’s attorney, told the justices in his argument.

The SCOTUS justices apparently agreed. In the majority opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that the “doctrine of ‘fair use’ is flexible and takes account of changes in technology. Computer programs differ to some extent from many other copyrightable works because computer programs always serve a functional purpose.”

The court said fair use plays an essential role when computer programs are being developed. Google’s use of code was “only what was needed to allow users to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program,” Breyer said.

“To the extent that Google used parts of the Sun Java API to create a new platform that could be readily used by programmers, its use was consistent with that creative ‘progress’ that is the basic constitutional objective of copyright itself.” 

For most of the packages in its new Application Programming Interface, Breyer noted that Google programmers did copy code from the Sun Java API, but they also wrote separate “declaring code” to make its Android software function correctly.

Breyer said the top court assumed “for argument’s sake” that the code was copyrightable in the first place, but it declined to issue a ruling on that question. He asserted that tying the ruling to fair use was enough to decide the case. 

The big get bigger

As you might expect, Oracle was anything but happy with the decision. 

“The Google platform just got bigger and market power greater. The barriers to entry higher and the ability to compete lower.” 

“They stole Java and spent a decade litigating as only a monopolist can. This behavior is exactly why regulatory authorities around the world and in the United States are examining Google’s business practices,” Oracle’s Dorian Daley, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, said in a statement.

Google has decided against imposing a 60-minute time limit on its free version of Google Meet, which previously would have gone into effect on April 1. Consumers don’t need to worry about the decision being an April Fool’s prank. The company officially tweeted out that until June 30, 2021, users can host calls up to 24 hours long -- or what Google refers to as “unlimited.”

The company says it continues to be sensitive to the pandemic’s impact on working remotely and communicating with loved ones. The change marks the second time Google has lifted a proposed time restrictions since the pandemic began. 

Working from home continues

Consumers who use Google Meet for work should be happy about the extension, but some workers may not have to hold virtual meetings for too much longer. 

Companies across the U.S. are starting to consider when they will have employees return to physical offices. Wells Fargo recently announced that it will be aiming to have its employees return to offices by September. 

If you’re looking for ways to stay productive while working from home lasts, check out ConsumerAffairs’ guide here.

There’s good news for Chrome users who think Google’s internet browser is slow and a memory hog. The company says it’s made some big time improvements in the efficiency column with Chrome 89, the newest version of its browser that was released earlier this month. 

Those improvements are supposed to be good for users on Mac machines, Windows computers, or Android phones. However, Google made no mention of any improvements specifically for Apple iOS (e.g. iPhones and iPads) users.

Chrome 89 is the second update Google’s made on its legacy browser this year. In January, it released version 88, which was focused mostly on security fixes.

What Google claims will be better

Google’s laundry list of improvements is a little deep in the weeds technically-speaking, but here’s what you can expect:

Memory improvements on Windows and Mac computers: In Chrome M89, Google says it’s seeing “significant memory savings” of up to 22 percent on Windows machines. To make that happen, the company is “discarding” memory that the open tab is not actively using, such as big images you’ve scrolled off screen. 

When it comes to Mac computers, Chrome is also shrinking its memory footprint in background tabs and says it’s seeing up to 8 percent memory savings. “Finally, with more data from the field on tab throttling, we’re seeing up to 65 percent improvement on Apple Energy Impact score for tabs in the background, keeping your Mac cooler and those fans quiet,” wrote Mark Chang, the company’s Chrome Product Manager.

Improvements on Chrome for Android: Google says it’s “repackaged” Chrome on Android so that users who were frustrated by occasional crashes should see those misgivings happen less. In addition, the company claims there’s a 5 percent improvement in memory usage, 7.5 percent faster startup times, and up to 2 percent faster page loads. 

For Android users who bought the latest Android devices (Android Q+ and 8GB+ of RAM), Google says those metrics will be even better.

“Finally, we’ve built a way for Chrome on Android to start up 13 percent faster,” Change says, citing the use of “Freeze-Dried Tabs.” “Chrome now saves a lightweight version of your tabs that are similar in size to a screenshot, but support scrolling, zooming, and tapping on links. We use these Freeze-Dried Tabs at startup while the actual tab loads in the background, getting you to your pages faster.” 

Google has announced that it will be distributing $25 million in grants to nonprofits and social enterprises focused on empowering women and girls. 

The company announced its new “Impact Challenge” on International Women’s Day, saying the grants are intended to help remove systemic barriers faced by women during their entrepreneurial pursuits. 

"Women and men remain on unequal footing -- and these inequalities have worsened in the wake of COVID-19," Jacquelline Fuller, president of Google's charitable wing Google.org, said in a blog post published Monday. 

Empowering women

Google has put out a call for applications from teams with a feasible plan for a project or innovation that will “create pathways to prosperity for women and girls or empower them to reach their full economic potential.” Applicants should have a proposal that is “grounded in research and data about the problem and the solution,” the company added. 

Grant recipients could receive between $300,000 and $2 million, as well as opportunities for mentorship and additional support from Google. 

"Whatever these teams need, we are going to be alongside them and help carry out their vision," Fuller said. 

The tech giant has started accepting applications from teams aligned with its mission. The deadline to submit is April 9. Applicants will be judged by a panel that includes U.S. Youth Poet Laureate Amanda Gorman, Google Chief Diversity Officer Melonie Parker, musician Shakira, and others. 

Sometimes things aren’t as they appear to be. After word from Google headquarters suggested that it was planning to axe third-party tracking cookies and stop selling ads based on tracking in its Chrome browser, reports are circulating that targeted ads aren’t disappearing completely. 

“You’re 100 percent still being targeted,” Elizabeth Renieris, an affiliate of Harvard University’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, told Yahoo Finance. However, Google approaches its detour a bit softer. 

"People shouldn't have to accept being tracked across the web in order to get the benefits of relevant advertising,” wrote David Temkin, Google's director of product management, ads privacy and trust. “And advertisers don't need to track individual consumers across the web to get the performance benefits of digital advertising," 

Renieris said that while Google won't replace cookies with other tools that track you individually, she believes the company is looking at alternatives that will lump users into bigger groups that have similar interests, which advertisers can buy ads for. An example might be a cosmetics blog where Revlon could take the contextual ad approach and pitch products like lip gloss.

Paying for content?

Privacy purists can moan about this all they like, but the fact remains that advertisements are the lifeblood of almost every site you visit. If there were no ads at all, it’s likely that websites would either have to set up paywalls for content or go to a subscription model. 

"The simple fact is that subscription and paywalls don't work for all publishers, and perhaps more importantly, they don't work for all consumers. Based on a recent survey we conducted on 5,000 U.S. residents as part of research for our 2021 adblock report, only 15 percent of respondents said that they are likely to purchase a paid subscription to access content,” Blockthrough’s Vishveshwar Jatain told ConsumerAffairs.

What Google’s decision means for your browsing habits

The first thing we should clear up is the difference between a “first-party cookie” and a “third-party cookie.” First-party cookies are issued from the site that you’re visiting, and their intent is pretty harmless. Let’s say you visit EPSN.com frequently. Your computer will be sent a cookie from the website that notes what your preferences are (e.g. your favorite team) so that you don’t have to drill down and find the news you’re specifically interested in each time you visit the site.

“On the other hand, advertising firms place third-party cookies on websites to track your online activities,” Yahoo! Finance’s Daniel Howley explains. “These advertisers use the information gleaned from those cookies to follow your activities across the web and feed you ads that line up with your general interests — a practice known as targeted advertising. These cookies can, in theory, be useful too, as they’ll serve ads for products you might actually want to buy.”

Howley says that the change in cookies for Google Chrome users might not be as glaring as it sounds. “If you want an idea of what Chrome will be like when it dumps third-party cookies, go check out Mozilla’s Firefox browser or Apple’s Safari, which have blocked third-party cookies since 2019 and 2020, respectively. It’s not exactly all that different,” Howley said.

At the end of the day, Google’s decision to ditch third-party cookies should still give end users a little more peace of mind when it comes to privacy. 

“Google's decision to kill third-party cookies is at least in part driven by the growing consumer discontent about being tracked online,” Jatain said. “Following this period of necessary change ahead of us, advertising will eventually become more privacy-focused, but it will still continue to play a pivotal role in supporting a free and open internet."

Google’s Chromium development team has announced that Chrome will no longer be supported on some older PCs powered by pre-SSE3 Intel Atom or Celeron M processors. 

Google says the number of users affected by the change is likely to be small because it will only affect Windows and Linux users running Chrome on very old systems. Impacted devices will be about 15 years old at this point, TechRadar noted. 

“Our analysis... indicates that there is a very small number of Windows devices running Chrome with x86 processors that do not support SSE3,” Google said in a note. 

Devices that don’t meet the new minimum CPU requirements will no longer attempt to install Chrome, and running Chrome itself will result in a crash. Google said users with affected PCs will soon start receiving warnings saying support for the browser will be ending soon. 

“Until we require SSE3, Chrome will warn impacted users (with x86 CPUs that don’t support SSE3) that their computers will soon be unsupported,” the company said. “The implementation will use the framework in //chrome/browser/obsolete_system. This will result in a dismissable warning bar, and a permanent warning in the chrome://settings/help page.” 

Google didn’t give specific reasons for dropping support for the browser, but the likely reason is that so few devices are still running SSE2. Upgrading from one of these older processors should result in better performance. 

Users who will be impacted by the upcoming change can either switch to a new browser or upgrade their device in order to keep using Chrome. 

Google has announced plans to convert some of its facilities into COVID-19 vaccination sites. 

In a blog post, the company’s CEO Sundar Pichai said COVID-19 vaccines will be distributed at Google’s “buildings, parking lots and open spaces” in a number of major metropolitan areas, including at campuses in New York City, Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Kirkland, Washington.

The clinics will be set up in accordance with guidance from local officials once enough doses become available. Google said the action was made possible through a partnership with One Medical and public health authorities. 

“The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply affected every community all over the world,” Pichai said. “It’s also inspired coordination between public and private sectors, and across international borders, on a remarkable scale. We can’t slow down now.”

Google said it plans to expand the sites nationally over time. The company also pledged $150 million to promote vaccine education and distribution. 

"While there is much uncertainty still ahead, the development of multiple safe vaccines in such a short time gives us reason for hope," Pichai wrote in a blog post. "We recognize that getting vaccines to people is a complex problem to solve, and we're committed to doing our part."

Tech companies stepping up 

Google isn’t the only tech giant lending a hand in the effort to vaccinate people. Microsoft has also announced that it will allow its campus in Redmond, Washington to be used as a vaccine distribution site. 

Amazon has also offered up its facilities, saying in a letter to the Biden administration last week that it’s "prepared to leverage our operations, information technology, and communications capabilities and expertise to assist your administration's vaccination efforts.” Amazon asked for workers at its fulfillment centers, data centers, and Whole Foods stores to receive vaccines at the “earliest appropriate time.” 

Google says it would have “no real choice” but to pull its search engine from Australia if a proposed law requiring the company to pay news publishers for content goes into effect. 

The company said its primary concern is that the law "would require payments simply for links and snippets just to news results in Search," said Google Australia and New Zealand VP Mel Silva.

"The free service we offer Australian users, and our business model, has been built on the ability to link freely between websites," Silva told Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation Committee on Friday.

“If this version of the Code were to become law it would give us no real choice but to stop making Google Search available in Australia,” Silva said. “We have had to conclude after looking at the legislation in detail we do not see a way, with the financial and operational risks, that we could continue to offer a service in Australia.” 

Australia hits back

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison issued a swift response, saying “we don’t respond to threats.”

“Australia makes our rules for things you can do in Australia,” Morrison said at a press conference in Brisbane. “That’s done in our Parliament. It’s done by our government. And that’s how things work here in Australia.”

The bill, called the News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code, would make Google and Facebook pay Australian media companies for using news content they pull from news sites. The law was introduced into Parliament in December to “ensure that news media businesses are fairly remunerated for the content they generate, helping to sustain public interest journalism in Australia.” 

Silva said Google isn’t on board with the law as it stands. Specifically, the company doesn’t want to pay for links and snippets it surfaces in response to users’ queries. Silva suggested that the bill be revised, saying Google feels there is “a workable path forward.” 

“There is a way forward that allows Google to pay publishers for value, without breaking Google Search and our business in Australia,” she said. 

Google announced on Thursday that its acquisition of Fitbit was complete, saying the deal would bring more sophisticated devices to the wearables market. However, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) now says its investigation into the acquisition hasn’t yet wrapped. 

In a statement to various media outlets, the DOJ said it’s still looking into the possible effects of the deal. Regulators previously expressed concern that Google could use Fitbit’s large swath of user data to personalize ads. 

“The Antitrust Division’s investigation of Google’s acquisition of Fitbit remains ongoing. Although the Division has not reached a final decision about whether to pursue an enforcement action, the Division continues to investigate whether Google’s acquisition of Fitbit may harm competition and consumers in the United States.” 

The agency added that it is “committed to conducting this review as thoroughly, efficiently, and expeditiously as possible.” 

But Google said in a statement that although the DOJ’s investigation is ongoing, the agency’s time limit for delivering a decision has passed. For this reason, Google said it felt comfortable finalizing the deal.  

“We complied with the DOJ’s extensive review for the past 14 months, and the agreed upon waiting period expired without their objection,” the company said. “We continue to be in touch with them and we’re committed to answering any additional questions. We are confident this deal will increase competition in the highly crowded wearables market, and we’ve made commitments that we plan to implement globally.” 

At this point, there’s no official word on whether the DOJ intends to take legal action against Google or Fitbit. 

Google announced on Thursday that it has completed its $2.1 billion acquisition of wearables maker Fitbit. 

The deal was first announced in November of 2019 and spurred an investigation into what Google planned to do with Fitbit users’ data. Fitbit has health data on more than 28 million users, and European regulators were concerned that the tech giant could use that data to help personalize ads. 

However, Google assured regulators that the deal was “about devices, not data” and promised not to use Fitbit data if the deal was approved. 

“This deal has always been about devices, not data, and we’ve been clear since the beginning that we will protect Fitbit users’ privacy,” Rick Osterloh, Google’s Senior Vice President of devices and services, said in a statement.

“We worked with global regulators on an approach which safeguards consumers’ privacy expectations, including a series of binding commitments that confirm Fitbit users’ health and wellness data won’t be used for Google ads and this data will be separated from other Google ads data,” he added.

Privacy commitments secured

European regulators investigating the deal gave it the green light last month after receiving commitments from Google regarding data privacy. 

"Google will continue to protect Fitbit users' privacy and has made a series of binding commitments with global regulators, confirming that Fitbit users' health and wellness data won't be used for Google ads and this data will be kept separate from other Google ad data," Chief Executive James Park said in a letter to Fitbit users Thursday.

Park said the acquisition will enable Fitbit to “do even more to inspire and motivate you on your journey to better health.” 

“We’ll be able to innovate faster, provide more choices, and make even better products to support your health and wellness needs. On our own, we pushed the bounds of what was possible from the wrist, pioneering step, heart rate, sleep and stress tracking. With access to Google’s incredible resources, knowledge and global platform, the possibilities are truly limitless.” 

More than 200 Google and Alphabet workers have banded together, trumpeting their intention to form a labor union -- The Alphabet Workers Union -- which will be open to both employees and contractors.

Its goal will be to tackle ongoing issues like disparity in pay, mistreatment, and controversial government contracts -- many of the issues that a group of U.S. senators pushed Google to stop in 2019. 

The structure of the union will be members-only. While going that route doesn’t allow the union to negotiate a new contract for its workforce, it will allow it to speak for any employee who seeks to participate, including temporary workers, contractors, and vendors.

“We’ve had enough”

While the organizing effort is still in its infancy and built mostly out of Google/Alphabet workers in the San Francisco Bay Area, its organizers are confident that the story they have to tell will help their effort spread.

“For far too long, thousands of us at Google — and other subsidiaries of Alphabet, Google’s parent company — have had our workplace concerns dismissed by executives,” Parul Koul, the executive chair of the Alphabet Workers Union, and Chewy Shaw, the union’s vice chair, wrote in a guest editorial in the New York Times on Sunday.

Koul and Shaw reminded the world that when Google was originally formed, its motto was “Don’t be evil,” then took the company to task for a litany of issues ranging from profiting from ads by a hate group to failing to make necessary changes to meaningfully address retention issues with people of color.

How much can be accomplished?

This is not the first time Google/Alphabet workers have joined forces to fight what they consider to be “abuses.” Organized workers at the company were able to get executives to drop Project Maven, the company’s artificial-intelligence program that the Pentagon contracted for, and Project Dragonfly, a strategy to launch a censored search engine in China. 

Still, the organizers need to prepare for a fight. If the recent past is any indication, Google/Alphabet will not take this effort lightly. Just a month ago, the company was not only accused of violating labor laws by monitoring workers, but by going even further and allegedly retaliating against -- and firing -- workers who were trying to unionize.

However, Koul and Shaw are confident that the effort can produce some positive results. They point out that some of Alphabet’s subcontractors “won a $15 minimum hourly wage, parental leave, and health insurance” after previous mobilization efforts. 

“And the practice of forced arbitration for claims of sexual harassment was ended after the November 2018 walkout -- albeit only for full-time employees, not contractors. A few months later, Google announced that it would end forced arbitration for employees for all claims,” the pair wrote.