There is really no reason to use Google Analytics anymore. There are many great alternatives now, mine is PanelBear.com. Other people love Fathom and Plausible. It’s great to see some unbundling happen.
Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
161–170 of 614 posts
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#162Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes? ...this was the original dream of non-national cyberspace and we almost had a hope at getting it. Then the second chance with web3 but this was also spoiled by people getting too greedy and too nasty too fast. A parallel anonymous-and-free-for-all-but-with-payments-included, smth. like Tor-but-powered-by-IPFSv9-and-Etherv7, will probably emerge in a couple decades done right after a couple failed iterations. Som…
I believe your argument simply boils down to "laws shouldn't apply to people". Am I mistaken?
Besides the missed irony, I mean that we need to have and we'll inevitably have a separate internet layer / set of protocols / etc. where information will be freely broadcastable and exchangeable without enforcement of any laws. We de-facto have it now too, but it's practically geek-only hence no real "broadcast" to masses of people function can be achieved.
And that once such tech becomes usable by a large percent of the general population (by eg. allowing "unsecure" websites to "do anything") and we make the mistake to add a truly functional and anonymous money transfer technology to this layer of information tech, we're royally screwed as a species.
I obviously don't want a lawless and free for all regular/default internet because on the regular internet we exchange real money and we have real identities. I'm perfectly OK with having lawless layer of information exchange and broadcasting (it's just a natural generalization and globalization of "free speech" and I think it's crucial for humanity) and even working to making them usable by the general population, as long as we don't allow any serious kind of money transfer and commerce to happen through them. Eg. A psycho posting a killing video once a decade is no biggie and would happen anyway, let's at least enjoy it / groups of psycho creating a market and industry for their "products", not ok. Two random guys planning to meet to exchange some guns for some money is no biggie and already happens anyway; trading weapons on scales to supply real wars not ok. Etc.
De-facto "having sites op-out of anti-fraud legislation" or of "human rights" protections is already happening, and is less obvious because of the centralized nature of our current internet. A less centralized internet will just allow it to happen in the open in theory. Only it won't because since they're already doing other more serious illegal stuff and don't want to draw attention.
PP's "Bizarre idea. Should websites be allowed" thinking was just funny and ridiculous at the same time: there's nothing bizzare, thing are already happening (naturally) like this, and ofc it's happening discretely (eg. having telegram or other messaging app groups instead of http websites but performing similar functions etc etc) and in the silence bc ppl doing them do even more illegal stuff and nobody wants attention from authority or ppl concerned with morality ...and I couldn't help make fun of it a bit. It's the kind of guys that argue against free speech and yell the "but think of the kids" argument at us all the time, and it's tiresome to have to trick them all the time since reasoning with them doesn't work...
So suggesting that maybe we should bring what's already happening anyway in the open, base it on more open standards technology, have it be indexable by search engines etc. :P I'd rather have a legal:any flag that I can add to a google search when I want to go off the beaten track then to have to switch the program/protocol I'm using (and the browser should make sure as hell I don't leak my identity and don't pay for anything on such unsafe sites), and that's the crux of it, the browser would know that a site is unsafe and needs total sandboxing simply because the site owner has decide to "opt out of the laws" - you realize that longer term when s settles down it's a win win situation for everyone if you just twist your mind out of the default narrative the current tech-corporate establishment is brainwashing you with...
(Or the "let's make a decentralized and truly free internet layer" into a real and usable thing... or the crypto-crimies will beat us to it and do a version that also has payments, generates obvious disasters/wars etc., and then is taken over by big gov and turned to a totalitarian nightmare with social credit tracking extra features" argument.)
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#164Well HN, how about a badge for links indicating whether it uses ga? We have to start somewhere don't we? Or we'll continue to see the web decline. Actually, from my PoV, it might be too late already. Maybe it's just me or people in EU being harassed with banner popups, but I hardly go to any link anymore, and so do many other people I know. It's just not worth it.
I'm an American, but I occasionally use an EU VPN. I don't understand how EU residents can tolerate the number of cookie/privacy/GDPR/whatever popups every site has, even on the sites of EU companies.
We don't. Outside of a few greybeards the vast majority of the population would gladly send all of their data including dick pics and credit card numbers to remove those popups.
The law was absolutely useless because 99% of the websites have an illegal implementation and still added a major annoyance in the form of the popup / banner.
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
ah, the ad hominem , never a good sign for the proceeding argument. there are a number of other office suites that are entirely adequate for bureaucratic organizations to build methodical processes around (which is what bureaucracies do). the capabilities of the underlying tools don’t matter much in this regard. also, audits aren’t meant to prove anything (like security), but instead to shift liability.
> ah, the ad hominem, never a good sign for the proceeding argument. GP never says that you’re naive, but the comment was.
either way (intent can also be multi-modal), it signals a triggered response and is entirely superfluous and distracting. it's worth setting that aside, even after writing it, and examining the emotional underpinnings that led to the response in the first place. we learn a lot about our own subconsciousness that way.
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#166Another decision in a long stream that will make it much harder for EU start-ups companies to catch up to American ones. With absolutely no improvements to actual EU citizen well being.
Maybe a race where the finish line is maximum exploitation of the digital population isn't a race worth running.
No post body was provided.
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#167Good. US citizens should be, at least, disappointed that their government is so bad at protecting their privacy, that US law is so far behind the times. To those companies and people who find these EU decisions baffling or inconvenient: tough. If you had had respect for your users this would not be an issue. You would already not be spying on them. To website visitors: if you see a cookie banner, the site is asking p…
Well I’m not an expert but I think the main issue is that American citizens have protections that non-Americans do not. The government cannot spy on Americans without a court order.
> The government cannot spy on Americans without a court order.
Have I got news for you. Specifically at least 100 years of news.
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#168There is really no reason to use Google Analytics anymore. There are many great alternatives now, mine is PanelBear.com. Other people love Fathom and Plausible. It’s great to see some unbundling happen.
Yeah, it was another one of those trojan horse programs. Offer something incredibly useful to website owners; something so compelling that they literally can't say no. An oh, it just happens to track the activity of every web user anywhere in the world.
The alternative offerings at the time were fairly awful compared to what google released.
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#169Good. US citizens should be, at least, disappointed that their government is so bad at protecting their privacy, that US law is so far behind the times. To those companies and people who find these EU decisions baffling or inconvenient: tough. If you had had respect for your users this would not be an issue. You would already not be spying on them. To website visitors: if you see a cookie banner, the site is asking p…
If I thought the EU was doing this to protect privacy I'd be all for it. They really don't give a fuck as seen by ever bit of legislation they are pushing for. Yes I also do understand that the EU in general view privacy from the government as illegal rather then a right.
Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics
#170i’d support any legislation that booted google, fb, ms, adobe, salesforce, and a whole host of other surveillance tech companies from any and all levels of government. it’s literally as important as the separation of church and state. in fact, i’d love to see a constitutional amendment explicitly separating corporate interests from governmental ones, in all facets of civic life (e.g., campaign finance).
How far does "separating corporate interests from governmental ones" go? Can the government purchase a car? Hire a private corporation to build a road? Hire a consulting company to check the security of their (now-free-and-without-a-support-contract FOSS?) computer setup?
where to draw the line is a fair question in any policy debate, and one i'd expect to draw plenty of lively discussion. it's pretty clear to me that surveillance tech is on the outside of that line, but i'm open to reasonable arguments otherwise.