Gregory's Server@williamoconnell @chriscoyier I don't get the conclusion that "it highlights the problems with GDPR" when the problem is clearly Google siphoning unaware users' data. Use a Google font and you make calls to ads.google, how is that not a problem? Why should it be allowed without batting an eye?
The second problem is wanting to use GAFAM's tools for everything without second thought. It's high time developers get to think critically of the things they use and impose on unaware non-tech users.
@jeolen @williamoconnell @chriscoyier The terms of service for Google Fonts are _very_ different from everything else at Google (see https://developers.google.com/fonts/faq/privacy)
They really try to do right here, but GDPR still requires consent before pushing PII (like IP addresses) to non-EU places.
That said, the CDN concept for common assets (like fonts or "standard" JS libraries) was more useful when multiple origins shared a CDN file. These days, browser download CDN files once per origin (i.e. website that's using it), removing most of the benefits of using a CDN.
tl;dr: Google Fonts is likely okay to use in theory, still requires opt-in by the user in practice, and doesn't even save bandwidth for the user like it used to.
@jeolen @williamoconnell @chriscoyier The terms of service for Google Fonts are _very_ different from everything else at Google (see https://developers.google.com/fonts/faq/privacy)
They really try to do right here, but GDPR still requires consent before pushing PII (like IP addresses) to non-EU places.