Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 314 posts

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#11
post #2

Why do they care?

If you are a paying customer, they don't (source: am a subscriber, never seen this). If you don't pay for a subscription, they need to monetize you in some other way- like by showing you more valuable ads.

You can get a very cheap online-only subscription if you have Amazon Prime, strong recommend.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#12
This is the problem about sites that want to show ads. I don't mind reasonable (not annoying) and responsible (I want to be sure ad links don't lead to frauds or viruses so I won't have to deal with any kinds of problems if I stop blocking ads on my mom's computer) but I absolutely do mind any kind of tracking. Why do ad-funded sites insist on tracking so much? I understand tracking adds value to advertisers but are ads really worthless without tracking?

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#13
I see the same behavior (v52.8.0). Damn.

Also, from a German IPv4:

> The new European data protection law requires us to inform you of the following before you use our website:

> We use cookies and other technologies to customize your experience, perform analytics and deliver personalized advertising on our sites, apps and newsletters and across the Internet based on your interests. By clicking “I agree” below, you consent to the use by us and our third-party partners of cookies and data gathered from your use of our platforms. See our Privacy Policy and Third Party Partners to learn more about the use of data and your rights. You also agree to our Terms of Service.

But "Continue to site" doesn't work unless I check "I agree". So they're clearly not GDPR-compliant. In order to access their site, you must agree to be tracked. And you must also disable protection against tracking.

Maybe there will be complaints filed?

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#14
post #8

Any time a site asks me to disable tracking protection, it has the curious effect of reinforcing my desire to leave it enabled - that site has made it clear that they are intentionally and unapologetically violating my privacy for a quick buck.

Personally, I appreciate the courtesy of them being up front. I'm happy to go elsewhere, and they save me the trouble of making sure my somewhat Rube Goldbergian-collection of privacy measures aren't acting up.

Win-win!

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#15
post #9

Good, the word "tracking" is a lot scarier than "ad", should make most users think a bit harder about the choice. However, it's highly irresponsible for them to tell users to do it, as it's a switch, not a whitelist (which is good since that would eventually defeat the entire purpose). I think the best you get is disable for a session.

It is a whitelist. There's a button that says "Disable For This Site" and the preferences page lets you manage the exceptions list.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#16
Not only should you use privoxy with tight settings to block everything

You should also disable QUIC in chrome Anything related to webassembly (like you know what it's doing...huge security risk there)

any video card accelerator interface middleware (information ratline)

you should turn all urls back to mozilla or google in the advanced settings (about:config and chrome:flags) back to 127.0.0.1 to disable them

get an extension to block canvas information siphoning (fingerprinting)

disable webRTC via extension or advanced settings

disable "native client" in chrome (allows google to watch what your'e doing)

disable any vnc

disable any "help" or "spellchecking in the cloud" or "predictive blah blah in the cloud" or

pipeline seems to be ok, security wise afaik

disable any "protect you from malicious sites" -- that's tracking everything you do

and use DNSSEC or DNS over TLS on your router, by for example flashing your router with dd-wrt or tomato or using an advanced firewall computer that can handle all this. It's kind of annoying to set up, but it will be worth it, if you care about your privacy

The worst thing you can do is set your dns to 8888 and 8844 that's basically giving all your internet activity to google, because of your convenience

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#17

Not only should you use privoxy with tight settings to block everything You should also disable QUIC in chrome Anything related to webassembly (like you know what it's doing...huge security risk there) any video card accelerator interface middleware (information ratline) you should turn all urls back to mozilla or google in the advanced settings (about:config and chrome:flags) back to 127.0.0.1 to disable them get an…

Sites like wapo need to find a better way to make money than being a blog for bezos and the CIA to mindrape everyone with disinfo nonsense

Sometimes you can lie by omission and democracy really DOES die in darkness

Ask WAPO who Imran Awan is, and why they didn't tell you for over 2.5 yrs now? Let's talk about the most viciously censored scandal in US history that is being blockaded by what has become a completely separate timeline for infocucks

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#20
post #8

Any time a site asks me to disable tracking protection, it has the curious effect of reinforcing my desire to leave it enabled - that site has made it clear that they are intentionally and unapologetically violating my privacy for a quick buck.

the problem with this line of thinking is that newspaper people need to actually make a buck. Or else there are no newspapers.
Post reply on HN