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

181–190 of 304 posts

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

#181

Post by [deleted] »

mike_hearn wrote: post #171
oconnore wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of ads is to convince people to buy things that they may otherwise not. That seems like the opposite of helping poor people. Also, if you are struggling financially, ad supported "content" is probably not a major concern in your life, and certainly not a solution to your problems.

Poor people aren't robots. They can and do see adverts for things that they don't then buy. Additionally ad targeting means they might see adverts for things they could afford and that's t be relevant to their life instead of things meant for rich westerners. The whole mental confusion between advertising and privacy in the technical and media community is really irritating. What's the alternative to advertising? Dir…

[deleted]

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

#182

Post by [deleted] »

mike_hearn wrote: post #171
oconnore wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of ads is to convince people to buy things that they may otherwise not. That seems like the opposite of helping poor people. Also, if you are struggling financially, ad supported "content" is probably not a major concern in your life, and certainly not a solution to your problems.

Poor people aren't robots. They can and do see adverts for things that they don't then buy. Additionally ad targeting means they might see adverts for things they could afford and that's t be relevant to their life instead of things meant for rich westerners. The whole mental confusion between advertising and privacy in the technical and media community is really irritating. What's the alternative to advertising? Dir…

[deleted]

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

#183

Post by bottled_poe »

Moru wrote: post #157
ivank wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some numbers from 2009 say 1.18 cents/search: https://web.archive.org/web/20110201052634/http://billwarner... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2110938

If google started taking money for searching they would quickly be marginalized.

How exactly? I thought we are assuming that advertising would become worthless if everyone was blocking the ads...

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

#184

Post by mQu »

gpvos wrote: post #167
jdbernard wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for one, they could fingerprint your browser: https://panopticlick.eff.org/

Is that really done to any real extent? The majority of users will have a standard configuration anyway.

Yes and no. In my tests with live traffic (fingerprint,ip) tuple was as good as standard tracking cookie. Sometimes even better because I could match "incognito" modes as well. This was however only for desktop browsers. Mobile has much higher conformity and yielded mostly false positives.

YMMV of course but for my purposes it was not worth it.

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

#185

Post by bottled_poe »

M2Ys4U wrote: post #95
threeseed wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2wzmmr/everythin... Apple is using third parties to help make Siri better not to make money. And let's be clear we don't know the contract between Apple and these companies. Given Apple's track record it should have numerous privacy conditions.

>Given Apple's track record Well Apple collaborate with the NSA, so that immediately disqualifies them from giving the slightest shit about privacy.

The government sets the rules, companies just play the game. Changing the laws an tax rules are the most direct way to influence the behaviour of businesses.

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

#186

Post by josteink »

Joky wrote: post #173
M2Ys4U wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Given Apple's track record Well Apple collaborate with the NSA, so that immediately disqualifies them from giving the slightest shit about privacy.

What's the alternative for any company? Leaving the US?

Challenge the law, like Microsoft does.

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

#187

Post by simoncion »

wlesieutre wrote: post #111
eps wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to butcher the quote. In full it has nearly the opposite meaning and it's far more intriguing - I believe that Mozilla can make progress in privacy, but leadership needs to recognize that current advertising practices that enable "free" content are in direct conflict with security, privacy, stability, and performance concerns -- and that Firefox is first and foremost a user-agent, not an industry-agent.

I don't see how that's opposite

The author's point is threefold:

1) Firefox should be software that serves its computer user's interests.

2) The Mozilla corporation is pressured (to whatever degree) to turn Firefox into software that serves the entertainment and advertising and surveillance industry's interests.

3) Sometimes Mozilla bends to industry interests rather than user interests. This is a bad thing.

When you excerpted that quote, you changed the author's statement into:

"Firefox serves the interests of computer users, rather than industry titans."

Understand? :)

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

#188

Post by mikro2nd »

toephu2 wrote: post #169
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…

"Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need." -Tyler Durden

Or, as I drummed into my kids heads, "If they have to advertise it, it is almost certainly not good for you."

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

#189

Post by devsquid »

sgift wrote: post #180
mike_hearn wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor people aren't robots. They can and do see adverts for things that they don't then buy. Additionally ad targeting means they might see adverts for things they could afford and that's t be relevant to their life instead of things meant for rich westerners. The whole mental confusion between advertising and privacy in the technical and media community is really irritating. What's the alternative to advertising? Dir…

> Poor people aren't robots. They can and do see adverts for things that they don't then buy. Ah, the grand delusion of advertisers put out again. Sure, people aren't robots, but if ads couldn't influence their behaviour no one would pay for them and there wouldn't be any.

Its definitely true ads are highly effective and one must admit highly effective on oneself as well. Look at Microsofts recent resurgence, their marketing budget has begun to rival that of Samsung and anecdotally I see their ads everywhere. However ads are not the end all. There are many deciding factors why someone buys a product outside of purely ads, but again ads are a very strong driving force. I don't think internet ads are nearly as effective at 'mind-influencing'(not being sarcastic) as the traditional mediums. I actually click on ads frequently on the web, because I see a product that might interest me. For example, I see an ad for Linode and it presents me a compelling price point so I go and investigate it. hmm I am not entirely sure what I set out to say in this response, but I don't think the point that ads are what keeps people poor is very accurate. I believe a lack of access to resources particularly relating to education and opportunity are what keep poor people poor.

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

#190

Post by dredmorbius »

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?

Consider alternatives such as DDG or YaCy and their cost structures.

The alternative need not replicate all of Google's infrastructure.

Post reply on HN