Browser Profile Data Deletion Query

[dark_energy68]

EDIT: To those who wish to contradict me. Be syllogistic in your arguments. Non-sequiturs are irrational.

---

.
Description of the issue:
When deleting a browser profile, we’re informed the data associated with the profile will be deleted, and it emphasizes on the resulting deletion of browsing data and further specifically includes 4 categories of information, namely;

1. Browsing history
2. Passwords
3. Bookmarks
4. Autofill data

Now, my concern is;

Common sense and the general understanding of English dictates that deletion of a profile’s data is to mean deletion of all data of such profile, including ones not mentioned above. But, the emphasis on the 4 above categories implies, implicitly, the deletion of only such data.

So, I wish to ask, what kind of data, exactly, explicitly, would be deleted?

Do you delete all of the profile’s data (just like if it were InPrivate) or is it just those above 4 categories?

And, now to those who argue this to having been intentioned differently;

Well, intentions do not alter the semantics of a language.

• The box is implicit, in nature. It lacks it’s own title to be explicit, and therefore depends on its preceding texts for connotation/context/reference.

• The connotation it forms, is that of a biased nature.

  • It has chosen specific categories, out of many more, to be depicted even when they are empty, suggesting their implicit association to the preceding texts, established above, as being of an absolute nature. (i.e., these are the only categories to be deleted.)

    • .------------------------------------
      Context - Data will be deleted
      ↓
      Emphasis - THIS DATA
      ↓
      Conclusion - THIS DATA will be deleted.
      .------------------------------------

    • Or, more specifically, these→ are the →only categories→ to be considered in the context →[implicit association]→ of it’s →preceding text→ which→ is on the subject of →deletion.

  • And, if they, by chance, happen to not be empty, the connotation would then be them being the only browsing data to have been recorded.

    • .------------------------------------
      Context - Data will be deleted
      ↓
      Emphasis - THIS DATA, WHICH has been recorded
      ↓
      Conclusion - THIS DATA, WHICH has been recorded, will be deleted.
      .------------------------------------

All in all, the bias leads to unintentional implicit remarks.

Remarks, which are unaffected by the writer’s intentions. A miscommunication, with unintentional consequences.

A mistake.

How can this issue be reproduced?

1. Create a new user profile in Brave
2. Open a new window through the right-click options of Brave, in Windows taskbar.
3. Go to delete the new profile.

Expected result:
You should see the following message:

Brave Version( check About Brave):

Version 1.48.167 Chromium: 110.0.5481.104 (Official Build) (64-bit)

Additional Information:

[SmartyAadi]

I guess, it will delete any data associated to that profile. The window you are showing is only to display what all data and their quantities have been saved. That is what I think. @Saoiray @Aman_M @rodrige might know more.

[dark_energy68]

Well, no browsing data has been saved, they’re all at a 0, and a bunch other categories have been dismissed. Which is to mean, if it is what you say, there is still a bias present that has produced unintentional implicit remarks.

Remarks, which are unaffected by the writer’s intentions. A miscommunication, with unintentional consequences.

A mistake.

[rodrige]

@dark_energy68

But, the emphasis on the 4 above categories implies, implicitly, the deletion of only such data.

The emphasis on those four is to warn users that they will loose that data. This gives them the opportunity to change their mind if they have not saved/backed up it somewhere else.

Deleting a profile means deleting the whole folder. So, basically everything related to that profile will vanish.

[dark_energy68]

The emphasis on those four is to warn users that they will loose that data. This gives them the opportunity to change their mind if they have not saved/backed up it somewhere else.

Intentions do not alter the semantics of a language. Your argument is foolish and without sense and reason.

Me telling you to “go to hell”, with positive intentions do not change the meaning of “go to hell”.

But, thank you for the clarification, nonetheless.

[dark_energy68]

And, now to those who argue this to having been intentioned differently;

Well, intentions do not alter the semantics of a language.

• The box is implicit, in nature. It lacks it’s own title to be explicit, and therefore depends on its preceding texts for connotation/context/reference.
• The connotation it forms, is that of a biased nature.
  • It has chosen specific categories, out of many more, to be depicted even when they are empty, suggesting their implicit association to the preceding texts, established above, as being of an absolute nature. (i.e., these are the only categories to be deleted. Or, more specifically, these→ are the →only categories→ to be considered in the context →[implicit association]→ of it’s →preceding text→ which→ is on the subject of →deletion.)
  • And, if they, by chance, happen to not be empty, the connotation would then be them being the only browsing data to have been recorded.

All in all, the bias leads to unintentional implicit remarks.

Remarks, which are unaffected by the writer’s intentions. A miscommunication, with unintentional consequences.

A mistake.

[dark_energy68]

You’ve acknowledged the 4 categories have been emphasized, and that it’s been done so to warn the users of the loss of such data.

In other words, you’ve admitted, a particular group of data, in a broad context of data deletion, were, alone, emphasized as being susceptible to deletion.

Context - Data will be deleted
↓
Emphasis - THIS DATA
↓
Conclusion - THIS DATA will be deleted.

Your acknowledgement incriminates you.

[dark_energy68]

Please, also, forgive me for any rudeness in my tone. I can promise you I did not mean it.