Live data from Hacker News

Firefox bullshit removal

gist.github.com

181–183 of 183 posts

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#181
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think maybe you misunderstood the point here. I agree Google is probably not directly selling your information it gathers to other people but instead is selling access to that information in the form of directed advertising. Google's in the business of knowing EVERYTHING they can about you, so they can better sell "you" to their customers (advertisers). You are not a customer of Google, you are their product. Nestl…

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Google's data is a part of their offering, but that doesn't somehow make me as a person a "product". Their products are AdWords and AdSense. These services network customers together who want to 1. make money from ads, and 2. advertise themselves. Google mediates this exchange between both parties, and uses data from users to target their ads more accurately. Calling the…

Maybe it is a bit hyperbolic, but their products are based almost entirely on the information they gather about you specifically(and everyone else they can).

Like you said "uses data from users to target their ads more accurately". exactly.

but when you say the only interaction with a user is in choosing which add to serve is misleading, at best. You can't currently say to google, I want this ad to be displayed to John Smith @ 1818 Mockingird lane. But you can buy ads saying this age group, in this city, interested in X and Y subject(s), which if you happen to also know about John Smith, will definitely reach him specifically (assuming John Smith sees a google delivered Ad, which is almost a certainty).

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#182
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cert expiration dates provide very little in the way of actual security. Normally it would mean that yes, your connection is secure, yes, everything matches, but you hadn't paid your protection money to the CA racket in a while. In my case, it's because I haven't had the desire to go in and redo the nginx config on this machine. But sure, that makes the content wrong, or something.

> But sure, that makes the content wrong, or something. If your own Nginx server cannot serve up a proper and protected session, why should I consider what you've written on the website? Actually how can I know that what I'm reading is what you wrote if the session is already compromised from the start? > but you hadn't paid your protection money to the CA racket in a while. Yes, you sometimes have to pay for that ce…

It is protected. Cert expiration has no impact on the safety of the connection whatsoever. LE uses the same encryption as the big guys, they just set the expiry date field to a lower number. Please explain how that meaningfully reduces security.

>Enough with the drama please.

Indeed. Petty sniping in an attempt to avoid engaging the content lowers the level of discourse substantially.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#183
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if it is the case, but the original plan was for Brave to replace ads with its own: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/mozil...

That is only if publishers and users consent. Both get paid in that case, 70% to publisher, 15% to user. But it's not the private ad model we are trying first. What we're most excited about are opt-in, user-private and -anonymous ads, long form and at low frequency, where you get 70% of the gross revenue. In either case some brand principles: 1. We pay 70% to the ad "inventory owner" -- the person who is giving atten…

Sorry for the slow response. Thanks Brendan for clearing up my misconceptions.
Post reply on HN