141–150 of 264 posts
Let me get this straight: even if my site has no ads or trackers, Chrome will now use my visitors data for advertising and surveillance??? Does anyone else see FLoC as worse than the current state we're in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blocking on my site the access from the Chrome browser only, or displaying a banner page – e.g. "You are using Chrome, thou shall not pass"
You have to capture the agent that is visiting and doAction() when it finds it. Here is adecent article: https://geekflare.com/block-unwanted-requests/
Why isn't this opt-in? I'm sick of having to add yet another config option every time some Web giant decides it is OK to abuse my website and my visitors.
It is. If you’re not calling ‘document.interestCohort()’ or serving ads from an ad network on your page then FLoC does nothing. The purpose of this permission is to prevent embedded third-party content from using FLoC.
Unless I’m misunderstanding, which is likely (and I hope I am)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The browser I use does not process Javascript or CSS. I therefore have to do nothing. :) However, I would guess switching browsers is extremely unlikely for a great number of users. Google must know that. That is why they can do something like FLoC. They must know that not many users are going to switch browsers.
I agree, but those users are not willing to setup a proxy just to disable FLoC headers either.
Nice website you have here. Would be a shame if no one can find it?
Today I looked at the source code of Chrome where this is implemented, so I'd understand it better. It made me realize that there is indeed (of course) software engineers (meaning: people) working on this who actually write that code. Does a high salary justify working on such features, or are modern day software engineers more like factory workers? I think not because most software engineers have a choice. Been thin…
> I think not because most software engineers have a choice. most people care more about their own interests than the interests of society in general. Only when collectively devising laws would society take the interest of society over individuals. Therefore, software engineers are fully justified at making software that is deemed unethical, but still take the stance that it is unethical. You might call it hypcracy b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have to capture the agent that is visiting and doAction() when it finds it. Here is adecent article: https://geekflare.com/block-unwanted-requests/
Thank you, I hoped it could be done from the website code. Currently I have a Hugo blog hosted on ahem Firebase – not the best de-Googled solution. :)
There is a nice thing in there, banning a google browser on a google product ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anything wrong with that? Good guy with a gun tends to hit a bystander, or cause dangerous escalation in situations that don't warrant it, or have their gun stolen. > If you make guns illegal only criminals will have guns. That's one way to look at the very short term. But then since "criminal" is not an immutable quality of a person, millions of people that weren't criminals that then commit a crime will have no g…
It doesn't matter what you call the groups, or even how many groups you come up with. The point is that some are more compliant than the others - the conformists, the law-abiding etc - and it's those that you'll disarm first. The ones who don't actually care about the laws beyond the extent to which they can be meaningfully enforced will retain the means for violence. The only way to pretend-break this recursion is t…
And the police are going to need some weapons whether or not you have gun control.
So sure, some groups are more willing to give up guns than others. And we should perform a cost/benefit analysis while keeping that in mind. Plans don't have to meet some standard of ideological purity before we can evaluate them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you be willing to entertain that maybe they died because most people who used phones found those platforms to be weaker product offerings with the things they cared about and that your value system may have fundamentally differences? Would you further entertain that the inability to perceive such realities and differences and manufacturers inability to navigate these preferences is a major determinant of succes…
Maemo didn’t even get a chance. A literal single device that was dead on arrival due to that burning platform memo. I miss my N9. One of the best smartphones I’ve used in the past 16 years
It's like the vintage synth people. Those are really popular products but most are not popular enough. The popular ones get reissues but most of the time the financials simply don't support a production run.
This response in the thread reminds me of what happened in the 1936 landon/fdr election. A magazine asked people to volunteer who they wanted to vote for. The landon voters were super passionate so they outnumbered the fdr voters who wrote in causing the magazine to falsely believe landon would win in a landslide. A guy named Gallop was watching this unfold, thought something was up, used statistical random sampling to guess what the magazine and general election would yield, got both right and changed polling forever. http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5168/
The handful of people downvoting and passionately responding to me are the Landon voters here. HN is exactly where this small group congregates.
There's simply not enough to keep the platform afloat. That's why the reboots have all eventually failed
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People around the world build machines that melt skin off of children in Middle East for quarter of that pay. Even in America. And they're proud of it too. Time to look outside of tech bubble perhaps?
> People around the world build machines that melt skin off of children in Middle East There is a problem with that statement and I will try to highlight it by creating a couple more of the same: - There are people working to build software to allow people to share child porn without getting caught (about Moxie and anyone working to bring e2e-encryption to the masses) - there were people working in factories that cre…
There are literally millions of people that deliberately do jobs that knowingly hurt people (and are built AROUND hurting and scamming people) and asking yourself "why would anyone try to improve on an ads tracking system while keeping ads around?" just really really comes out as horribly naive and oblivious. Not to mention that there are even millions more of jobs where significantly more harm is done as a side effect that doesn't come close to showing a damn ad based on their amazon purchase.