Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

donttrack.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 178 posts

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#91

Post by util »

daten wrote: post #83
shimonamit wrote: post #78

I'm still dreaming of a search engine that parses regular expressions. When that happens I'm there. Yesterday.

It would be an interesting day if someone could make regular expression searches over a large data set as fast as keyword or phrase searches against a sorted and indexed database. They also need to make sure they use an implementation that doesn't suffer from exponential time[1] regular expressions. [1] - http://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html

This basically exists for source code now: http://www.google.com/codesearch

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#92

Post by huertanix »

jeromeflipo wrote: post #14
wyclif wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's how Google SSL differs from default Google: http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer.py?answer...

... which confirms that Google SSL protects my privacy as much as DDG, right?

Only if you turn off your Google account's Web History.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#93

Post by brudgers »

Matt_Cutts wrote: post #79
brudgers wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If SSL was the default and sending headers was opt-in, it would probably add some weight to your argument. What Google actively promotes to the typical web user, however, is not SSL or anonymous search but rather features that collect user data to an ever greater degree, e.g. Toolbar, Instant Search, and the Chrome browser.

SSL adds latency, because you're setting up an encrypted connection. Google hates slowing down users, and we don't want to slow down every user unless it's a clear win. That's one reason. When Google switched to AJAX-based search, that temporarily stopped sending referrers, and lots of people screamed bloody murder. For example, http://getclicky.com/blog/150/googles-new-ajax-powered-searc... said "So what can we do a…

Your argument would carry more weight if, the user had the ability to switch to SSL search from the "Classic" search page or if SSL search was a setting that was accessible from "Search Settings" or "Advanced Search" on the "Classic" page.

The articles you reference speak to the problems for advertisers and related interests. They do not address issues of web user privacy.

Don't get me wrong, Google is in the difficult position of balancing the display of results based on advertising revenue with the display of results based on utility to the user.

What I see Google facing is that given their market share and mind share and the typical web user's tolerance for providing information it is probably easy to make a business case for skewing the balance. The problem is that there is no precedent from which to draw long term conclusions about loss of anonymity at the scale at which it currently occurs.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#94

Post by btilly »

eddieplan9 wrote: post #86

Kudos to DDG. Finally a good alternative to the big G. What scares me the most sometimes is when I think about how ubiquitous Google's ads network and analytics network are. Most of the websites I visit use AdSense and/or Google Analytics. Some are using Google's copy of popular javascript libraries like jQuery. This means that when you are moving from site A to site B to site C, there is a good chance that even thou…

Some are using Google's copy of popular javascript libraries like jQuery. This means that when you are moving from site A to site B to site C, there is a good chance that even though A or B or C does not know about it, Google knows your full browsing path and even how you move from one to another.

Wrong.

When a browser gets a request for a JavaScript file that it has seen before, it returns a cached copy from the local hard drive rather than sending out a request to the website. Therefore sites that use Google's copy of jQuery are maximizing their chances of having browsers not make a round trip, rather than giving Google something that they can use for tracking.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#95

Post by gojomo »

epi0Bauqu wrote: post #39
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #35

The first sentence when I stripped out the pictures was "When you search Google, and click on a link, your search term is sent to that site, along with your browser & computer info, which can often uniquely identify you." Referrers are a part of the way the web has worked since before Google existed. They're a browser-level feature more than something related to specific websites. But if referrers bother you, just us…

The referrer header is indeed a reality of HTTP, but that doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't work around that reality and correct for it, if it has real privacy implications, which I think it definitely does. By getting rid of that header I think we take away a lot of private context, i.e. the actual search terms that landed you on that page, which in and of themselves can provide a lot of background into what was p…

Mixing the 'search term' and 'browser & computer info' points in the same lead sentence is misleading, suggesting (again to the 'average' person) you're more different from Google than you are.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#96

Post by BrandonM »

zackola wrote: post #25

I've been using Duck Duck Go as my primary search for the last month - it's pretty great! And if you need to fallback to google because you want a map or something else there are a bunch of ! shortcuts to go right there. (!map is most frequently used by me)

I'm forever confused by technical users who laud DDG's ! support. I love DDG and use it as my primary search engine, but Firefox has featured keyword searches for years now. Any search box anywhere can be turned into a URL keyword search.

I use "m" for searching Google Maps, "im" for Google Images, "w" for Wikipedia, "dict" and "thes" for dictionary.com, "bt" for searching torrents, and the list goes on. Just yesterday I added one so that I can type "to 123 Main St 12345" in the Location Bar and it automatically gives me the Google Maps driving directions from my house to the indicated address.

It's as simple as right-clicking a search box and selecting "Add a Keyword for this Search...". Use it :)

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#97

Post by tonfa »

AnthonyJBentley wrote: post #85
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SSL adds latency, because you're setting up an encrypted connection. Google hates slowing down users, and we don't want to slow down every user unless it's a clear win. That's one reason. When Google switched to AJAX-based search, that temporarily stopped sending referrers, and lots of people screamed bloody murder. For example, http://getclicky.com/blog/150/googles-new-ajax-powered-searc... said "So what can we do a…

I think moving to SSL as a default is a good move. What difference does no logging on the receiving end make when your ISP can log everything you search for? In particular, GMail initially had SSL configurable, but then moved it to the default: http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/default-https-access-f... . Apparently they don’t think the latency is a problem—or if they do, that it’s worth it to get the security be…

I don't think latency is a problem for something like gmail, you open it once and much of it happens in an already opened connection or in the background.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#98

Post by samtp »

aw3c2 wrote: post #33

That site turned me off. I am using DDG as my primary search engine for many months now. I really dislike the style and "atmosphere" of that site. The images are seemingly unordered and could use some borders. The images of the dog biting the women or the predator disgust me. Then some "motivationals" and memes that do not help the case. This site gave me mental stress (the left-alignment of varied sized text and ima…

It looks like something that was thrown up quickly. If you have 'mental stress' because some pictures and text lacks design, the problem may be you, not the website.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#99

Post by tonfa »

rayvega wrote: post #50
cletus wrote: post #37

I have a question: does this policy of DDG violate their legal responsibilities? Thats a serious question. I believe that law enforcement requires some form of data retention but I'm not sure what.

IANAL, but I don't think so. What law would that be? If I walk into any retail store and pay with cash, is the store owner required by law to get my personal info? No, they are not. Perhaps in heavily regulated industries such as banking that might be different but search engines are not government regulated (for now).

There are data retention laws in other parts of the world (many european countries for example).

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#100

Post by mariuskempe »

fwdbureau wrote: post #21

I'm sure google is not as "evil" as those recent bashing campaigns tend to insinuate, but the fact is, if google could publish clearer, more-defined data-privacy or data-retention policies instead of the vague assertions you can find in their TOS, things would be clearer. The current situation is just feeding doubts, and nothing serious or accompanied by hard facts comes to contradict this illustrated guide

Agreed. The deeper you delve into Google's TOS, Privacy, or other legal-requirements pages, the more their corporate identity of 'fun and clear' dissolves.
Post reply on HN