Never Use Incognito Mode Again...
Credibility score: 76/100 — Mostly Credible. Analyzed 27 claims. Found 1 low-credibility claim(s). 19 claim(s) rated as highly credible.
Claims analyzed
Incognito mode is pointless and doesn't hide you from the internet — Mostly Credible (80/100)
Bro called it 'one of the most pointless things' like he's dropping truth bombs — and damn if he's not right, incognito ain't magic 💀✅😤
BrowserGate: LinkedIn scans browser without consent — Mostly Credible (78/100)
'BrowserGate' — love the dramatic name drop like it's Watergate 2.0, but yeah this Microsoft finger-pointing scandal actually happened last year 💀👀
LinkedIn scans computers for software, sends to US-Israeli firm — Mostly Credible (42/100)
Jumps from browser fingerprinting to 'searching your computer for installed software' and 'espionage' — that's some spicy fanfic on a real story 📱💀🚩
They can't see your desktop, only browser — Mostly Credible (80/100)
Solid callout — browser tracking is wild but they ain't peeking at your desktop cat pics. Fair play on the 'scary' vibe 💀👀
LinkedIn reads browser data without consent, sends to US-Israeli company — Mostly Credible (92/100)
OK fine, this part is annoyingly spot-on — no consent popup for their snooping, and yeah they ship data to partners. Hate being right with them 😤✅🔥
Chrome opens computer to entire internet — Mostly Credible (45/100)
"Opens your computer's __ to the entire internet"? Bro that's hype — Chrome's risky but not a full front door 💀😬🚩
LinkedIn code sends data to protects.net — Mostly Credible (80/100)
20,000 lines to protects.net? Sounds shady AF but let's see if it holds up — dropped that like it's checkmate 💀👀
LinkedIn scrapes your computer's extension list — Mostly Credible (82/100)
'Meant to scrape your computer' — said that so casually like we all signed up for browser colonoscopy 😤🔍✅
LinkedIn catalogs 6,000+ Chrome extensions — Mostly Credible (92/100)
6,000 extensions? I'm actually impressed they did the math — this tracks perfectly with Chrome Web Store data 😤✅🔥
No consent for scanning 6,222 extensions — Mostly Credible (95/100)
6,222 with 'no [expletive] consent' — FINALLY someone calling out Big Tech's favorite loophole 😡✅💀
LinkedIn catalogs Dean Shield and Porta AI for blurring haram objects — Mostly Credible (80/100)
Dean Shield? Sounds like a WWE fever dream but Porta AI is legit real-time haram blocker — wild what LinkedIn's serving up 💀🕌✅
LinkedIn profiles you without consent or login via extensions — Mostly Credible (65/100)
Extensions ratting you out to LinkedIn without login? Shady as hell but technically true — your browser's spilling the tea 👀🚩😬
Incognito mode doesn't protect privacy; Google sued over it — Mostly Credible (95/100)
Incognito is a myth and Google got sued for lying about it — I'm mad this dude's actually right for once 😤✅🔥
57 data points in browser fingerprint make it unique to one person — Mostly Credible (82/100)
57 data points? Specific number like they read the spec sheet — entropy studies back the uniqueness, number's legit-ish 📊✅👀
Trackers link browser fingerprint to logged-in accounts across sites — Mostly Credible (92/100)
Cross-site fingerprint + account linking is how the surveillance sausage gets made — 100% how adtech actually works 😤✅🕵️
Perimeter X connected to IDF Unit 8200 — Mostly Credible (65/100)
"Some even connected them to Unit 8200" — classic guilt-by-alumni-association 💀. True many founders have that resume line, but company ≠ IDF spy op 😬
Human is platform for trusted interactions, bot/fraud prevention — Mostly Credible (88/100)
Human's actual site says exactly this — caught 'em red-handed sharing fingerprint data 💀✅📱
Browser extensions share your data with Israeli surveillance — Mostly Credible (35/100)
Data 'shared with Israeli connected group' for 'nasty surveillance' — bro this went from browser fingerprinting to Mossad fanfic real quick 🚩💀😭
LinkedIn says browser gate claims are plain wrong — Mostly Credible (95/100)
FINALLY something accurate — LinkedIn DID call it 'plain wrong' and banned the dude for scraping 🙄. I'm mad this conspiracy dude quoted the debunk correctly 😤✅
LinkedIn detects extensions by checking static resource URLs — Mostly Credible (92/100)
This is straight-up standard browser fingerprinting — techies been doing this since forever. Actually correct and I'm mad about it 😤✅🔍
Uses detection data to fight scrapers and stabilize site — Mostly Credible (85/100)
Fair reason — scraping DOES tank site performance at scale. Can't argue with server logs screaming for mercy 📊✅
German court ruled against scraper, for LinkedIn — Mostly Credible (95/100)
German court said 'nein' to the scraper AND called out HIS shady practices. Checkmate 🏛️😤✅
Extensions detect Amazon delivery scheduler and trucks unrelated to job seeking — Mostly Credible (80/100)
Dropping 'Amazon delivery scheduler' like it's spy novel gold — fair call if the JS code says so, but sounds like guilt by keyword association 💀👀
They're searching for 'anti-woke' in browser data — Mostly Credible (45/100)
'Anti-woke' as a tracking keyword? Bro that's some next-level political profiling paranoia — zero proof it's real 💀🚩😭
Scraper lost court case but pushes narrative online — Mostly Credible (50/100)
Savage but fair — dude lost in actual court, now YouTube lawyer hours 💀⚖️
Microsoft/LinkedIn data collection not illegal despite allegations in Germany/California — Mostly Credible (65/100)
Concedes it's 'not illegal' then name-drops Germany/California lawsuits like that proves shady — classic both-sides energy 🙄😬
Every large tech company scrapes all browser data — Mostly Credible (90/100)
Nailed it — 'crack, surveil, and look through' is the most poetic roast of Big Tech spying. I'm mad it's spot-on 😤✅🔥
See the full analysis with sources and timestamps →