bz.drome-portdeplaisance.com
New recipes

Google's Genius New Feature Means Never Waiting in Line for Brunch Again

Google's Genius New Feature Means Never Waiting in Line for Brunch Again



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.


Check the wait time for your favorite restaurant before leaving the house

Dreamstime

Google’s new “Wait Time” feature allows you to keep an eye on estimated wait times for nearly a million different restaurants.

Gone are the days of waiting in hour-long lines for a sit-down meal at your favorite restaurant. Sometimes mimosas can’t wait! Thanks to Google’s new feature, diners will be able to know ahead of time how long it’ll take to get seated — and even plan ahead to beat the crowd.

Starting November 7, hungry patrons can find the average wait times for nearly a million restaurants on Google Search. “Wait Time” estimates do not function in real-time, but are based on anonymized historical data. This is similar to the company’s “Popular Times” feature — which shows how busy a place can be at different hours of the day — and the “Visit Duration” feature, which shows how long customers stay on average at a specific location.


To find wait times, just search for any walk-in restaurant on Google, open the business listing, and scroll down to the Popular Times section where you’ll see the estimated wait time at that very moment. Tapping on any of the hour bars will allow you to see the estimated wait time for that period, and by scrolling to the left or right, you can find a summary of wait times for each day.

And just in time for the holidays, this feature will be available for grocery stores experiencing high-volume shopping for Thanksgiving dinner supplies. Not in the mood to cook this season? No worries — here are 18 chain restaurants that will be serving Thanksgiving dinner this year.


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content


Brave reveals why it is disabling Google's FLoC in the browser

When Google announced FLoC, an attempt to replace interest-based advertising that is based on cookies with something else, it was clear from the get-go that Google's plans would face heavy opposition. The Electronic Frontier Foundation published an article criticizing Google's take on the next generation of interest-based advertising, and DuckDuckGo updated its browser extension to block FLoC outright.

Several browser makers confirmed already that they won't support FLoC in their browsers, even if Chromium-based, because they believe it is a bad idea for user privacy.

Brave, maker of Brave browser, published a new post on the official company blog in which the company reveals why Brave browser won't support FLoC. The arguments are not new, but they may help understand why everyone, besides Google and other advertising companies, think that FLoC is bad for privacy.

Brave focuses on three aspects of FLoC that it believes make the Web head in the wrong direction:

  • Sites are informed about browsing habits, even if users never visited them -- this is a very strong argument, considering that sites did not know anything about a user if that user never visited the site this is especially true for users who disable third-party cookies in their browsers, and use other protective means. For the average user, FLoC will still reveal more about their interests than before.
  • FLoC adds a strong identifier for fingerprinting -- FLoC's cohorts are made up of thousands of users, but that is a tiny group when it comes to fingerprinting. Coupled with other fingerprinting techniques, it could pave the way for improving fingerprinting accuracy.
  • Google should not be the one determining what is sensitive and what is not -- Google wants to exclude sensitive categories, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, and others from being used by FLoC, to avoid creating cohorts made up of these groups. To exclude these, Google somehow needs to know about these, as it would not be able to make the determination otherwise.

Brave removed FLoC in the Nightly versions of the browser for Android and the desktop, and will remove FLoC code from all Brave releases this week.

Vivaldi revealed this week that it will disable FLoC in the Vivaldi browser as well.

Closing Words

All in all, it is a good time to consider moving away from Google Chrome, either to one of the available Chromium-based browsers, or to Firefox. Browser extensions like uBlock Origin do block FLoC as well.

About Martin Brinkmann

Related content