91–100 of 117 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, you can do that. Google Analytics is merely a free version of that service.
Free to you, the user pays with their data. This is apple giving the user the option not to subsidise the website operator.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, you can do that. Google Analytics is merely a free version of that service.
Free to you, the user pays with their data. This is apple giving the user the option not to subsidise the website operator.
Personally I am not at all concerned when my data is used for marketing. Instead, I like learning about products tailor-made for me. By privacy I understand not sharing data with the public or with the oppressive regimes when it may lead to harassment, firing or arrests of people. But using my data to sell me some watches or bike parts? I'm in.
The internet is used for more than shopping. Your searches should not be public domain. Your health records. Your location. The time you go to bed at night. Where your house is. How many children you have. When you’ll next be away from home on vacation. That you looked around on a dating website while married. That you’re gay in a country where it carries the death penalty.
I advertise on Facebook but I can't see anyone's searches or current location. Although I can target people who are interested in LGBT or people who have been to SFO recently. If they like my post, I can also see their name and photo.
That seems reasonable to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Original commenter stated that > The Google Analytics beacon is still sent by the browser This is what I'd like some clarification about. Wether policy changed or if it is just a UI change is another subject. Do they actually block GA or not? And if not does the UI mislead users to think otherwise?
Original commenter here. They are not blocking GA. Apple's ITP affects both 3rd party HTTP cookies and 1st party JS cookies. There does not appear to be anything but a UI change between Safari 13.1 and 14, from my initial analysis. GA primarily utilises 1st party JS cookies. If you have GA on example.com then the cookie will be stored against example.com. On of these cookies stores a unique ID for you as a user. GA w…
I've done a bit more reading. This is not as dramatic as it seems. First party GA is not blocked. Access to 3rd party storage may be blocked, but this would not prevent web interactions from being visible to GA.
I love this feature in Safari. You open a new tab or browser window and there is a message area letting you know what is being blocked.
I am sick and tired of large tech companies like Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc. making money off of my data with scant benefit to me.
Not to pick on Facebook and Google, but I only use them now (well, almost) for paid services. I happily pay Facebook for Oculus Quest hardware and entertainment. I happily pay Google for music, books, movies, and Google Cloud Platform (which I personally like much better than AWS).
I've done a bit more reading. This is not as dramatic as it seems. First party GA is not blocked. Access to 3rd party storage may be blocked, but this would not prevent web interactions from being visible to GA.
I've done a bit more reading. This is not as dramatic as it seems. First party GA is not blocked. Access to 3rd party storage may be blocked, but this would not prevent web interactions from being visible to GA.
What is the difference between First party and third party GA?
I believe that this would limit GA's ability to store data in cookies on my system (user or session-based attributes). GA could still create unique identifiers based on my user or session-based attributes and store those IDs on their own servers, then call them back up when I revisit the site.
I'm still coming up to speed on this, maybe someone with more experience could correct or clarify my statements.