Live data from Hacker News

Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

bugzilla.mozilla.org

11–20 of 113 posts

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#11
post #2

This is an interesting topic. Should I deliver different experiences depending on DNT header?

Yes.

If you choose to send an e-mail newsletter to your users, you should (at least) be obliged to provide an unsubscribe option - providing two different experiences.

If you choose to track your users, you should (at least) be obliged to assume that DNT users have opted-out of this tracking and be responsible for not tracking them.

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#12
post #4
post #3

Do Not Track is silly. For example: You come on to my site, I want to know how you're using it, I don't want your personal details, I just want to see how you're interacting with the site I've made for you. Why do I want to know? Well it depends on the purpose of the site, but for the most part it is so that I can optimise and improve what my site offers to you and others. But you've politely requested that I don't t…

>> I have a right to track how people use my site. But you don't have a right to say what runs on my computer, or make it tell you what I'm doing. This is where our perceived rights collide. >> once you've made that choice you are within my domain, under my roof, living by my rules. No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules. >> People get way too offended by analytics tracking when it's there for their benefit.…

> No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules

His website.

Seriously, people should be warned that they are tracked, the purpose for which they are tracked and what exactly is tracked. Google Search for example is giving warnings lately, that you have to manually dismiss (probably because of EU laws) and I view that as being progress.

On the other hand demanding of publishers to not track you while you're on their property is unreasonable. Of course, you can complain about it, you can stop using such services or websites and so on. Voting with your wallet (or eyeballs) still works, even on the web.

I also view the "Do Not Track" header as a good thing, because it's an automated way for publishers to respect your wishes, should they choose to do that. But customers must also understand that this header represents a kind request, nothing else and we shouldn't make it something else, as that's a slippery slope.

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#13
post #2

This is an interesting topic. Should I deliver different experiences depending on DNT header?

If the experience in question involves the tracking of users in some way, then I think it's pretty clear that there should be a different experience for users with the header set, versus those without it. Those who provide that header should, as the name of this functionality very clearly states, not be tracked.

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#14
post #10
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules. I think of websites like private properties. You are given conditional access on the assumption that you can behave (T&C / AUP), otherwise it's like trespassing. So, I don't think that people should expect excessive rights of freedom that they might have on their own property or even in public. It's a balancing act.

That's really not how I think, nor does it really reflect reality, IMHO. They are on my property, it's all rendered and running in my browser on my device. All that's happened is I've requested some data from the server and they've given it to me, from then on how I display it and what gets run is entirely up to me. If we want to attach terms and conditions to it (i.e. to use this site you must accept analytics/track…

> If we want to attach terms and conditions to it (i.e. to use this site you must accept analytics/tracking/advertising) then lets make a framework to automate this stuff.

This has already been done years ago, and failed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P3P

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#15
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I have a right to track how people use my site. But you don't have a right to say what runs on my computer, or make it tell you what I'm doing. This is where our perceived rights collide. >> once you've made that choice you are within my domain, under my roof, living by my rules. No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules. >> People get way too offended by analytics tracking when it's there for their benefit.…

> No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules His website. Seriously, people should be warned that they are tracked, the purpose for which they are tracked and what exactly is tracked. Google Search for example is giving warnings lately, that you have to manually dismiss (probably because of EU laws) and I view that as being progress. On the other hand demanding of publishers to not track you while you're on their…

>> His website.

Running in my browser.

>> On the other hand demanding of publishers to not track you while you're on their property is unreasonable.

I'm not on their property. I'm fairly happy for them to record what they can see at their end in terms of what pages I go to, but I find it very unreasonable to demand that I run whatever code the website operator asks me to run, to turn my computer into a machine that reports anything/everything about my site interaction to anyone the site owner feels like, and all on the basis of an implied social contract of some form.

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#16
post #8
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I have a right to track how people use my site. But you don't have a right to say what runs on my computer, or make it tell you what I'm doing. This is where our perceived rights collide. >> once you've made that choice you are within my domain, under my roof, living by my rules. No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules. >> People get way too offended by analytics tracking when it's there for their benefit.…

> No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules. I think of websites like private properties. You are given conditional access on the assumption that you can behave (T&C / AUP), otherwise it's like trespassing. So, I don't think that people should expect excessive rights of freedom that they might have on their own property or even in public. It's a balancing act.

This is probably a discussion I would prefer us to have offline but the gist of it is that as a nascent industry, we have to make strides towards self-regulation very quickly. The NAI knows about the dangers lurking ahead. Overregulation is not a bogeyman. It is a real threat.

DNT is good for us. We don't want to track someone who explicitly does not want to be tracked (boo, Microsoft IE team!)

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#17
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really not how I think, nor does it really reflect reality, IMHO. They are on my property, it's all rendered and running in my browser on my device. All that's happened is I've requested some data from the server and they've given it to me, from then on how I display it and what gets run is entirely up to me. If we want to attach terms and conditions to it (i.e. to use this site you must accept analytics/track…

> If we want to attach terms and conditions to it (i.e. to use this site you must accept analytics/tracking/advertising) then lets make a framework to automate this stuff. This has already been done years ago, and failed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P3P

Shame, that sounds quite good.

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#18
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, my computer, my browser, my roof, my rules His website. Seriously, people should be warned that they are tracked, the purpose for which they are tracked and what exactly is tracked. Google Search for example is giving warnings lately, that you have to manually dismiss (probably because of EU laws) and I view that as being progress. On the other hand demanding of publishers to not track you while you're on their…

>> His website. Running in my browser. >> On the other hand demanding of publishers to not track you while you're on their property is unreasonable. I'm not on their property. I'm fairly happy for them to record what they can see at their end in terms of what pages I go to, but I find it very unreasonable to demand that I run whatever code the website operator asks me to run, to turn my computer into a machine that r…

If you don't like it, don't use it - simple as that.

The only thing I find reasonable is for users to be warned that they are tracked, precisely for enabling them to move to alternatives that better respect their wishes.

His website is running in your browser by your choice, not his ;-)

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#19
post #11
post #2

This is an interesting topic. Should I deliver different experiences depending on DNT header?

Yes. If you choose to send an e-mail newsletter to your users, you should (at least) be obliged to provide an unsubscribe option - providing two different experiences. If you choose to track your users, you should (at least) be obliged to assume that DNT users have opted-out of this tracking and be responsible for not tracking them.

That does not seem apples to apples. Should I provide an "opt-out" of all advertising for people who just don't like looking at ads?

Re: Do Not Track is not respected on mozilla.org

#20
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> His website. Running in my browser. >> On the other hand demanding of publishers to not track you while you're on their property is unreasonable. I'm not on their property. I'm fairly happy for them to record what they can see at their end in terms of what pages I go to, but I find it very unreasonable to demand that I run whatever code the website operator asks me to run, to turn my computer into a machine that r…

If you don't like it, don't use it - simple as that. The only thing I find reasonable is for users to be warned that they are tracked, precisely for enabling them to move to alternatives that better respect their wishes. His website is running in your browser by your choice, not his ;-)

>> If you don't like it, don't use it - simple as that.

>> His website is running in your browser by your choice, not his ;-)

Excellent, now how do I know ahead of time, or without digging through the source, which sites are going to try and run this stuff?

--edit-- Also, and here's the rub - again I just requested some data from his server, and it provided it to me. I made no promise to render or run it in the way he wants. If he has requirements about that sort of thing then maybe he needs to specify them.

Post reply on HN