151–160 of 273 posts
Google is pretty clear about this. The only reason they track you is for advertising, and there isn't any evidence of them using the info for anything else. In fact there is a lot of evidence pointing the other way, such as their insistence on encryption data flowing between their datacenters.
This is Google we are talking about, not Kazakhstan, China or Russia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I have buy a 1TB plan to hold 999GB of data and it takes months to push that data up... That ZOMG WHAT A DEAL! of a plan is kinda worthless... "Slam" is a bit of a loaded word, since... if they are selling 1TB of storage, shouldn't we get 1TB of storage? That's the same crap that ISP's tried to pull with UNLIMITED INTERNET !!! ( as long as you stay under 30gb per month)
> if they are selling 1TB of storage, shouldn't we get 1TB of storage? You do, they're just not allowing you to store it in 24 hours. Some services (Backblaze, if I recall) allow you to ship a drive to get around this limitation. Notice that all services do this? If you can do better, build one! Prepare to go broke from the peak bandwidth requirements you'll need to build your networking architecture to support such…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't there self-hosted analytics anyway? Piwik[1] comes to mind first, but I'm sure there are many. 1. https://piwik.org/
Piwik is incredible. But it should be noted that it does provide a scaling challenge for high traffic use cases (> hundred million actions per month), and hosting your own analytics is expensive. I bring this up because people had been slamming moot for using GA on 4chan instead of piwik without understanding why.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of these types of services seem to intentionally cap upload speeds to reduce their potential storage liability (since they're likely over-selling storage to be able to offer 1 TB for $12 with the level of redundancy, staffing costs, etc, needed). I wonder if that is happening in this specific case? Although if it were the case the vendor should still be honest about it. Just saying they limit uploads to 2 Mbps i…
It's definitely possible to offer that on a monthly basis if you model that each customer stays for 36-39 months. Also, I doubt that they are using replicated storage, but are using erasure coding instead. Also, they dedupe before upload, so more cost savings there.
I don't get it. SpiderOak states that they dropped GA because it furthers "the erosion of privacy on the web.”, but then they just started tracking in house. How is tracking in house more private than GA? The user is still being tracked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of these types of services seem to intentionally cap upload speeds to reduce their potential storage liability (since they're likely over-selling storage to be able to offer 1 TB for $12 with the level of redundancy, staffing costs, etc, needed). I wonder if that is happening in this specific case? Although if it were the case the vendor should still be honest about it. Just saying they limit uploads to 2 Mbps i…
> reduce their potential storage liability Its to reduce their maximum bandwidth capacity required. I don't see it as a problem, considering their price points. They're selling you storage, not "slam 1TB of your data into our storage system in a day". If you're looking for that, ship a hard drive to Iron Mountain. EDIT: Even AWS limits how fast you can upload to S3, and built an appliance for you to rent and ship bac…
They should be looking to partner with someone who has bandwidth problems in the other direction. By combining a backup service's upload bandwidth and a streaming video service's download bandwidth into one AS, you can get a more balanced stream, and qualify for free peering.
The other thing is that google analytics is on many adblockers lists, precisely for that reason. As adblockers are getting widespread, the analytics is going blind.
I've been running a blocker to block GA and other junk on my PC, but I imagine I'm in a statistically insignificant minority. And I still can't block them on my iPhone unless I disable JavaScript entirely (though I'm running iOS 9, I'm not able to install a blocker for some reason; I guess Apple arbitrarily doesn't support them on my older iPhone model).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being paid for doing work by those who need the work done is the opposite of "extracting rent".
Being paid for doing work has nothing to do with extracting rent , which is the practice of inserting yourself as a middleman so other people have to pay you "rent"[1] where none should be required. The entire idea behind writing a Service as a Software Substitute[2] is about extracting rent. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking [2] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-se...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, so you are passing some client IDs over the GA after all. An IP address perhaps? You know that's a leading question, right? Incidentally, I ran similar experiment with gaug.es few years ago - pulled on their tracking API from our server side. While it worked as expected, these sort of shenanigans are good for only one thing - hiding the fact that you are using 3rd party analytics from your visitors. On a more gen…
No. I am not passing IP. I am not passing a client-id. I am not passing any kind of correlation identifier from which a session can be inferred or created. I am not passing user-agent information. I am not passing a cookie ID. I am only passing a page view event. "Page /foo/bar?bash has been viewed". Take a look here: https://code.google.com/p/serversidegoogleanalytics/ Tell me where in that example (mine is similar)…
GA has many utilities, mainly is to follow the user and see the funnel they go and second to monitor the marketing campaigns. If you don't need this, then Apache log + webalyzer is perfect for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> reduce their potential storage liability Its to reduce their maximum bandwidth capacity required. I don't see it as a problem, considering their price points. They're selling you storage, not "slam 1TB of your data into our storage system in a day". If you're looking for that, ship a hard drive to Iron Mountain. EDIT: Even AWS limits how fast you can upload to S3, and built an appliance for you to rent and ship bac…
> Its to reduce their maximum bandwidth capacity required. They should be looking to partner with someone who has bandwidth problems in the other direction. By combining a backup service's upload bandwidth and a streaming video service's download bandwidth into one AS, you can get a more balanced stream, and qualify for free peering.
A great model would be to parter with CDNs; they pour content out to eyeball networks, but you could run a distributed network of your storage system across all of their POPs.