41–50 of 239 posts
NXVIM, pizzagate, Weinstein, Epstein, the Catholic Church--all I see now are echoes of Elizabeth Bathory and feudalism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think a VPN is enough, it will mask your location but there are so many ways your browser can be fingerprinted so you would need to have fingerprint resistant browser profile, maybe with JS off is possible.
>so you would need to have fingerprint resistant browser profile easy. use firefox, open about:config, and set privacy.resistFingerprinting => true.
Mindgeek runs all of the biggest porn sites, and also runs its own ad network. Since the biggest of those sites are their "tube" sites, they run into the same issues as youtube when it comes to tracking individual tastes. Since the product is porn, which is very easily classifiable with a list of the physical features of actors (with maybe a few behavioral distinctions), the actors in the video, how they are matched…
I’ve met their head of data science. They’re doing all that stuff and have been for many years. Porn has always been leaders in technology. They were the first to embrace home video and can arguably be credited for VHS winning over BetaMax despite being inferior, because it was cheaper and all the porn was VHS only.
This is something that is always mentioned, but sometimes I wonder if it is not a myth, or a simple exaggeration or simplification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VPN protection from site-level tracking is basically nonexistent. Browser fingerprinting is widespread and bypasses anything a VPN might offer. VPN is effective against network-level issues, not against browser-based tracking - it's a different level in the stack.
Virtual machines have the same virtualized graphics drivers, if everyone used virtual machines for browsing and deleted cookies and cache, web tracking would be restrict to IP-based.
Looks like everyone - vulnerable population or not - should be using VPN when viewing pornographic content.[1] [1] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2019/07/why-you-n...
VPN protection from site-level tracking is basically nonexistent. Browser fingerprinting is widespread and bypasses anything a VPN might offer. VPN is effective against network-level issues, not against browser-based tracking - it's a different level in the stack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think a VPN is enough, it will mask your location but there are so many ways your browser can be fingerprinted so you would need to have fingerprint resistant browser profile, maybe with JS off is possible.
>so you would need to have fingerprint resistant browser profile easy. use firefox, open about:config, and set privacy.resistFingerprinting => true.
Just visited on my mobile and didn’t get the same effect. It was different back in the day.
Mindgeek runs all of the biggest porn sites, and also runs its own ad network. Since the biggest of those sites are their "tube" sites, they run into the same issues as youtube when it comes to tracking individual tastes. Since the product is porn, which is very easily classifiable with a list of the physical features of actors (with maybe a few behavioral distinctions), the actors in the video, how they are matched…
I’ve met their head of data science. They’re doing all that stuff and have been for many years. Porn has always been leaders in technology. They were the first to embrace home video and can arguably be credited for VHS winning over BetaMax despite being inferior, because it was cheaper and all the porn was VHS only.
This is typically repeated but I question if there is actual proof of it rather than one of those '8 glasses of water a day' which just keeps getting passed along or some kind of plausible and believable anecdote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VPNs don't help here. https://panopticlick.eff.org https://gist.github.com/joepie91/5a9909939e6ce7d09e29
According to panopticlick, Chrome is 100% secure in incognito mode.