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

Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

monica-at-mozilla.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 304 posts

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#131

Post by lern_too_spel »

ddebernardy wrote: post #36
jacquesm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that was more or less the point of the GP minus the condescension bit. Making unqualified statements about what you believe about a large corporation is roughly on par with contesting that particular belief.

Then again Apple has a track record and APIs to put forward. Just about every API in iOS puts privacy first. If you want e.g. location data, the API asks the user's permission -- including with Apple's own apps.

That's no different from every other major mobile platform. The other ones do one better and build their own apps entirely using the same APIs that third parties have access to, which is why Firefox exists on those other platforms.

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#132

Post by ploxiln »

hrjet wrote: post #113

As a user of NoScript + Firefox and as a developer of a browser with an express goal of "privacy by default"[1], I am thrilled to see this getting more attention. The more people use privacy features, the more will website developers ensure that their products degrade gracefully when, for example, third-party scripts are disabled. Which will enable even more users to migrate towards a "privacy by default" configurati…

I use ublock with firefox. I worry the opposite will happen:

When a website doesn't work, you can look at the specific blocked domains and types of content and selectively unblock for the current domain, or you can be lazy and just turn off ublock for the current domain.

I worry that if tracking/ad blockers become very popular, then websites that don't work will be rewarded with all the tracking/ad blocking being turned off by most people.

I used to just use flashblock for click-to-play. I like the simplicity of that - it attacks the biggest problem in a totally generic way, and if the main content is flash, you can almost always just click on it.

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#133

Post by devsquid »

Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealthier has over those would can not afford it. Your idealistic 'superior' ad free world is as alienating and as segregated as Silicon Valley is...

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#134

Post by lern_too_spel »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #59
bsder wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple believes in user privacy. Your naïveté is touching.

And your condescension is irritating. Apple seems pretty solid on the protection of users' privacy. Devices are encrypted by default, for example, and there are robust protections from rogue applications in place. Is there are specific practice that Apple engage in that makes you think they are particularly reckless regarding users' privacy?

He's comparing Apple to Google. In that respect, Apple comes out looking pretty bad. Google's devices are also encrypted by default and have much more robust protections against rogue applications in place (both static and dynamic automated analysis of apps for malware, vs. just a human eyeballing it).

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#135

Post by [deleted] »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #121
rossjudson wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is this "content" you speak of, that must be funded through advertising? I checked the internet, and have been able to find very little worthwhile ad-supported content.

You must be very selective. I'm curious how you'd feel if it turned out most of Ycombinator's successful ventures depended upon advertising; thereby supporting this very site and community.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#136

Post by toomuchtodo »

devsquid wrote: post #133

Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…

How much would a Google search cost me if it wasn't ad supported?

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#137

Post by tritium »

devsquid wrote: post #133

Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…

  tracking != advertising

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#138

Post by devsquid »

tritium wrote: post #137
devsquid wrote: post #133

Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…

tracking != advertising

Clearly, but the Blog post is also about ads.

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#139

Post by ivank »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #136
devsquid wrote: post #133

Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…

How much would a Google search cost me if it wasn't ad supported?

Some numbers from 2009 say 1.18 cents/search:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110201052634/http://billwarner...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2110938

Re: Firefox tracking protection decreases page load time by 44%

#140

Post by the8472 »

ploxiln wrote: post #132
hrjet wrote: post #113

As a user of NoScript + Firefox and as a developer of a browser with an express goal of "privacy by default"[1], I am thrilled to see this getting more attention. The more people use privacy features, the more will website developers ensure that their products degrade gracefully when, for example, third-party scripts are disabled. Which will enable even more users to migrate towards a "privacy by default" configurati…

I use ublock with firefox. I worry the opposite will happen: When a website doesn't work, you can look at the specific blocked domains and types of content and selectively unblock for the current domain, or you can be lazy and just turn off ublock for the current domain. I worry that if tracking/ad blockers become very popular, then websites that don't work will be rewarded with all the tracking/ad blocking being tur…

for powerusers µMatrix may be a better choice than µBlock, it allows you to selectively allow/disallow specific content types from 3rd party domains.

E.g. this thread's article requests a lot more than what it needs to be readable:

http://i.imgur.com/wPML2lM.png

Post reply on HN