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

Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

paramdeo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 264 posts

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#151

Post by kristopolous »

prox wrote: post #140
kristopolous wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet they failed to gain a foothold in Windows Mobile after literally decades trying and they had to take 4 swings at Netscape before they really gained inroads. I question that common folklore and claim it uses anecdotal cherry picked non rigorous evidence. It's just a bad theory. Of course monopolies try to leverage their position as IBM tried with their failed MCA bus and failed XGA standard and failed OS/2 product…

That last point you make is crucial. Your average user just wants to go “on the web”, but doesn’t really know any difference between one browser or the next. This is why IE6 thrived, plus companies adopting it as their default install.

Exactly. Talk all the shit you want, and we can do it all day with IE6 but it did what people needed and it hit numbers north of 90% and had staying power unlike any other browser/version pair since.

If you want to understand how humans relate to technology, writing such things off as irrelevant, simply because IE6 was technical swiss cheese, is foolish.

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#152

Post by majewsky »

mellavora wrote: post #121
shakna wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add the HTML equivalent to the document head:

Hey, thanks for this! I've seen several posts now saying that all you need to do is add ``` Permissions-Policy: interest-cohort=() ``` somewhere, but they all seemed to assume that everyone knew where that where was (nginx config? webserver config? index.html? ??? ??????

It's an HTTP header, so follow the documentation for your tooling for how to add custom HTTP headers.

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#153

Post by shakna »

mellavora wrote: post #121
shakna wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add the HTML equivalent to the document head:

Hey, thanks for this! I've seen several posts now saying that all you need to do is add ``` Permissions-Policy: interest-cohort=() ``` somewhere, but they all seemed to assume that everyone knew where that where was (nginx config? webserver config? index.html? ??? ??????

When you see something along the lines of:

Foo: things

This will generally be a HTTP Header. How you add that depends on your server/framework. (And will be well documented).

If you've only got a static site, then you can always fallback and use HTML to achieve the same thing with http-equiv, which gets added to the head element:
For example to redirect to /foo after 3 seconds:
It's a little off the beaten track for most people, but the kind of knowledge a web developer can be expected to know, or know where to look in the documentation.

Hopefully that can help you in your future endeavours.

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#154

Post by Kim_Bruning »

alpaca128 wrote: post #113
skinkestek wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here we disagree. Weapons stopped Hitler. Weapons stopped USSR. Weapons stop US. Weapons stop todays Russia. Weapons are tools too. Mostly to scare away an attacker before they strike but sadly sometimes also to strike back. Double sadly they also come with the possibility to strike first. But in the choice of us being armed and Russia and China and the middle East being armed or everyone being armed except us I take…

> Weapons stopped Hitler. Weapons stopped USSR. Weapons stop US. Weapons stop todays Russia. That's just a rephrasing of the same old "good guy with a gun" meme.

Very old indeed!

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_vis_pacem,_para_bellum

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#155

Post by pdenton »

shakna wrote: post #43
imwillofficial wrote: post #10

Anyone have any idea how one might do this in a Ghost Blog? Outside of putting cloud flare in front?

Add the HTML equivalent to the document head:

I don't think the meta version of Permissions-Policy ever got implemented. "http-equiv" isn't a magic "here's a HTTP header I forgot to mention" pixie dust.

Better stick to the actual recommendation of adding the header in the server configuration.

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#156

Post by encryptluks2 »

_underfl0w_ wrote: post #18
encryptluks2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Firefox sending URLs you visit to a an external service not constitute as unhealthy?

"What about $otherthing?" Neither is good, but that doesn't necessarily make the topic you're attempting to pivot to relevant in this situation. Also, Cloudflare (provider of the external service you mention, assuming you're talking about DNS-over-HTTPS) definitely isn't Google. At least not yet.

No, I'm talking about their browser protection feature that is supposed to check for malware and unsafe domains.

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#157

Post by mda »

jahewson wrote: post #72

Has nobody bothered to read anything about FLoC? The purpose of this permission is to prevent embedded third-party content from using FLoC. Besides that it’s a no-op. FLoC does not track arbitrary websites, it tracks sites which retrieve the FLoC cohort via JS. So instead of dropping a unique third party cookie, and associating it with the data on the page, sites can now retrieve a k-anonymous cohort id and associate…

Well, we are out in the field with torches and pitchforks at hand, do you really expect us to read anything?

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#159

Post by gregoriol »

dastx wrote: post #110

Maybe it's time for developers to help with the fight back. Break things in Chrome, and encourage people to use Firefox. The amount of time I've been told to use Chrome is ridiculous. I regret being part of the crowd who jump on the Chrome bandwagon when it came out all those years ago. Having to explicitly opt out regardless of what you do is terrible. So now you're telling me that I have consciously disable it ever…

Sadly most users don't even know that they are using Chrome or Firefox or that these have a version number. So breaking up things for them won't help, they won't make the switch...

It has to be a regulatory decision imposed on Google, much like when Microsoft was forced to do something about Internet Explorer long time ago.

Re: Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network

#160

Post by martius »

bigiain wrote: post #107
aaronharnly wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems not. The FLoC page ( https://web.dev/floc/ ) says: > For pages that haven't been excluded, a page visit will be included in the browser's FLoC calculation if document.interestCohort() is used on the page. During the current FLoC origin trial, a page will also be included in the calculation if Chrome detects that the page load ads or ads-related resources.

> if Chrome detects that the page load ads or ads-related resources. Let me guess, “ads-related resources” are not defined, but in a court case in 5-10 years time it’ll be accidentally revealed that internally Google considers this to include “JavaScript, css, or HTML files”...

It's a good idea to read the article:

> During the current FLoC origin trial, a page will also be included in the calculation if Chrome detects that the page load ads or ads-related resources. (Ad Tagging in Chromium explains how Chrome's ad detection mechanism works.)

Ad tagging? https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs...

> Ad Tagging works by matching resource requests against a filter list (...) to determine if they’re ad requests. Any requests matching the filter are tagged as ads. Further, requests (and some DOM elements such as iframes) made on behalf of previously tagged scripts are also tagged as ads by the AdTracker. An iframe will be marked as an ad iframe if its url matches the filter list, if tagged script is involved in the creation of the iframe, or if its parent frame is an ad iframe. The main frame of a page will never be tagged as an ad. Any request made within an ad iframe is considered an ad resource request.

I can't find what is included in this filter list, I'm not sure it's open source.

(mandatory disclaimer: I work at Google, not on Chrome nor ads)

Post reply on HN