Live data from Hacker News

Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

github.com

251–260 of 642 posts

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I moved into IT almost 10-15 years ago, Google was one of the companies that I adored (in a kind of naive way, but nevertheless..). Working at that company has always been a dream of mine. They had the reputation for hiring the best of the best engineers, with great benefits and work culture. Meanwhile I'd hate to apply for them. Everything they do in terms of tracking, etc. has become so vile and almost evil th…

Well, I'm an ex employee. Actually nothing has changed inside the company. "Tracking" as you put it isn't perceived as evil, it never has been, and for good reasons. The only thing that's changed is people's perception of the company and - very recent post 2016 political issues aside - that was mostly driven by a sustained campaign by an angry media industry that wanted money (see: link taxes). Firstly, if tracking u…

Most people use default settings and have no idea about the software they are using at all. "everyone would hate it" assumes people know about these things, but they do not. Don't use this as a point.

ad 3), you make it sound as if it was one xor the other. This is sometimes the case to some degree (like checking urls for phishing sites), but far from always.

ad 4), it is not my problem as a user that you have trouble doing tests. If you need information for your business, then spend the money and effort to acquire it. Do not abuse your users without care. Your business case is not more important than people's privacy. And if others do this to gain an advantage over your business, don't whine, sue them.

When I was involved in user tests we had a lot of trouble due to our ethical concerns, but we did not consider dropping these concerns.

edit: I may add that I'm German. We were taught about the value of privacy in our history. "boring statistics about religion" led to the murder of hundreds of thousands of Jews. Disregard for privacy led to the atrocious human rights violations in Eastern Germany. I cannot understand why Americans, who explained this to us Germans after WW2, apparently forgot all about the _reason_ for privacy.

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#252
post #6

Doubtlessly, this will be rationalized and justified as being necessary for, and in the best interest of, consumers... ...but inevitably, it will be used for tracking -- regardless of intent. It might also get Google in trouble. Copying and pasting from the a comment in the OP's URL: > Example: https://www.youtube.com - in network headers, look for x-client-data > Now, go to https://ad.doubleclick.net/abc - and your…

It seems my comment may have been misinterpreted.

I meant that this will be rationalized and justified BY GOOGLE.

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We thought Microsoft was evil because of how they treated their partners and competitors. We didn't consider that a greater evil would arise, and all it would take was a disregard of the sanctity of personal privacy.

To my knowledge Google still hasn't done anything comparable to the worst offenses of Microsoft in its prime. These "tests" don't really help though.

> > and all it would take was a disregard of the sanctity of personal privacy

;)

I would have been aghast if you had told me 30 years ago that by now our movements, purchases, letters, phone calls, photos, rolodex, walkman, television, and more would all be connected to a central database and used to produce models to coerce us into changing our behaviour.

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#255
post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this what cookies are for?

Cross-site cookies are soon getting blocked by Chrome starting Chrome 80 if I'm right (whereas this header isn't)

So they build a personal back door to a feature that they've chosen to remove for everyone else? Because of it's potential for abuse, yet the very same company is somehow abusing it in a way more sinister way. Antitrust can't come soon enough.

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be evil... Until we are deployed enough that users don't have a choice... Now that Google has cornered the market for Internet browsing, they're using that foothold to change how it works to suit their dominance. This is why they are not concerned about per-site tracking that Google Analytics does, as long as THEY as a company have direct browser-based tracking, they no longer need to provide tracking services…

True. But luckily you actually have a choice. Many opt for DuckDuckGo on Firefox, for instance.

You can probably be identified on Firefox too: https://amiunique.org

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#257
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Baker's compensation has been inversely tied with performance You've mentioned this twice in the thread now. "Inversely tied" is quite a strong and unusual claim for compensation. Care to prove it?

Happily! 2.5 million, 2018: https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2018/mozilla-2018-fo... 2.3 million, 2017: https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2017/mozilla-2017-fo... 1 million, 2016: https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2016/2016_Mozilla_Fo... https://static.mozilla.com/moco/en-US/pdf/2015_Mozilla_Found... Firefox market share has been in decline (30% to https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61…

That's not "tied", which would imply a contractual relationship...

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#258
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Programmers should stop pushing buggy or incomplete software as is, and start releasing software that works If you demand a perfection-of-function guarantee from something as complicated as a web browser, you'll never get a web browser with more features than the ones released in the '90s (and I'm not even sure we'd be that far along by now). If I'm given a forced choice between "more privacy" and "the software eve…

Instead of giving my privacy away, I prefer software like anything that you have installed from a CD-ROM back in the 90's and didn't needed a weekly update. Games, 3D-Studio, Autocad (to name a few) were more complex than a web-browser ( a today's web-browser ) and didn't needed a weekly update or the hunger for user-requested features, let alone dialing home because . The world worked relatively fine without the up-…

I remember them.

They were also buggy and could crash their resident OSs all the way to a stuck state, and if they did, the solution was "Try not to trigger that bug again."

Software quality has significantly improved in the era of easy patch access and auto-patching.

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#259

So, an extremely unique identifier for tracking purposes, that effectively no one knows exists, and no one knows can be changed at all? With an obscure white paper that allows Google to claim they comply with the law because "they totally offer a way to change that and they even published that information to the web for anyone to find"? Gotcha.

Your comment is factually incorrect.

13 bits of entropy is not an extremely unique identifier.

The first three letters of your first name have more bits of entropy than that. It would be quite a trick to uniquely identify you by the first three letters of your first name.

Re: Google tracks individual users per Chrome installation ID

#260
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. What people actually want is some form of income equality, which would bring executive level salaries in line with their actual worth. You're not going to achieve that by starving non-profits of executive talent in the meantime.

I respect you a lot, but how is what Mozilla's doing in regards to that at all respectable? It's not "starving them of talent" to not increase Baker's pay as Mozilla is laying off employees? She's been there since (almost) the beginning, and the performance of Mozilla has gotten worse over the last decade.

I'm responding to the general complaint that executives at large non-profits are paid too much, and therefore the non-profit is not using money wisely, and so should not be donated to. There's a certain pool of people who are qualified to run companies of these sizes, and in order to attract that talent, you need to pay a competitive wage. The non-profit-ness of the company can be a factor, but like it or not, money is a major motivator, and will affect what kind of talent you can recruit. The problem isn't that a given non-profit executive is overpaid, the problem is that all executives are overpaid.

This isn't a Mozilla problem, it's an income equality problem. Punishing Mozilla by restricting the size of the pool from which they can recruit won't solve the problem.

I can't speak to the current Mozilla executives' performance. I'm not qualified to judge that. I will say that browser market share seems a poor metric, especially given the reach and pocketbook of Mozilla's primary competitor.

Post reply on HN