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

Who wants to be tracked?

quantable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 273 posts

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#211

Post by dylan604 »

godelski wrote: post #208
todd8 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks...I'm think I'm too sensitive about it since this comes up every f'ing time.

Not too sensitive. All of us get annoyed at things we have to constantly reiterate. At least that other user revealed their insanity after they kept talking. Literally explaining why you could never have known, despite claiming you should have "thought harder." Don't feel guilty, you're not the one with the evil idea. We should, of course think long (and sometimes evil), but it's impossible to predict what others wil…

>Literally explaining why you could never have known,

That's the entire point of coming from the future to the past with information unavailable. It's pretty much Time Travel 101 sci-fi trope. Rather than going back in time with sports scores and stock picks, I was putting it towards nerdy tech dev. Sheesh

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#212

Post by glitcher »

titzer wrote: post #138

FTA: > “We value your privacy…” There's a special place in hell for the originators of this Orwellian triple-speak. Three meanings overlapped: meant to give users the impression that "we respect your privacy" or "we protect your privacy"--but it doesn't say that. It says they value your privacy, which is literally true; they're happy to put a dollar amount on it and sell or mine it, because it's of value to them . Th…

Or said another way, they can't say "we take your privacy seriously" without first saying "we take your privacy"!

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#214

Post by spacechild1 »

dylan604 wrote: post #205
todd8 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I didn't invent it for browsers, I invented it for distributed file systems before the "World Wide Web" had even been invented. You might as well have a talk with William Shockley or Vint Cerf.

Exactly. How could you have known it would be used for what's it's used for now. That's the entire point of the conversation someone from the future could tell you. Why is that unclear? Maybe you're assuming a negative conversation? There are many decisions in my life that if a future me or someone else could show me exactly how things will play out in ways not foreseen by me at the time, I'd be less hostile than you…

What? His reply is just a natural reaction to the hostile and reproachful tone of your comment.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#215

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

Why did nobody tell the GDPR folks to require websites and browsers use one standard interface for the permission updates? It could have been so simple. Just let the browser prompt me so I can tell the browser once and for all what I want. Instead it created a website UX virus.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#216

Post by oh_sigh »

dylan604 wrote: post #205
todd8 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I didn't invent it for browsers, I invented it for distributed file systems before the "World Wide Web" had even been invented. You might as well have a talk with William Shockley or Vint Cerf.

Exactly. How could you have known it would be used for what's it's used for now. That's the entire point of the conversation someone from the future could tell you. Why is that unclear? Maybe you're assuming a negative conversation? There are many decisions in my life that if a future me or someone else could show me exactly how things will play out in ways not foreseen by me at the time, I'd be less hostile than you…

This is such a ludicrous comment chain. The tone was clearly negative. You said you said you wanted to have a chat "about needing to envision longer term visions for how nefarious people can be".

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#217

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

denton-scratch wrote: post #186
yason wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be wrong but I think the EU regulation that forced these cookie acceptance forms―I can't remember if it was GDPR or some earlier directive―specifically required that the consent submission may not be automated so that the browser can be configured to accept everything. It may have had good intentions as entities such as Microsoft would just set their browsers to default to accept all cookies anyway and a marg…

> the EU regulation that forced these cookie acceptance forms No such regulation has ever existed in the EU.

Non tracking ads pay something like 90% less than tracked ones.

If your salary was going to be cut 90% tomorrow unless you started every conversation with the exact words 'I might remember this conversation later', would you just take the paycut?

So no, they didn't require them in plain text. But they essentially did so when the only real alternative was to go out of business.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#218

Post by operator-name »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #71
yason wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be wrong but I think the EU regulation that forced these cookie acceptance forms―I can't remember if it was GDPR or some earlier directive―specifically required that the consent submission may not be automated so that the browser can be configured to accept everything. It may have had good intentions as entities such as Microsoft would just set their browsers to default to accept all cookies anyway and a marg…

> I think the EU regulation that forced these cookie acceptance forms Yep, i'm just not sure if it was general incompetence or just plain lobbying by third parties to do so.

The EU regulation enforced _asking users for permission before being tracked_ for non legitimate interests. There is new regulation in progress that mandates opting out to be as easy as opting in ("the Good").

None of this would be a problem if companies only used cookies for legitimate purposes.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#219

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

denton-scratch wrote: post #189
TekMol wrote: post #15

I have switched one of my sites to cookieless analytics and it is bad for everybody. I can't even say how many users this site has now. It could be the same user coming back over and over. Or many users. How would I know. Yes, I could track a ton of stats about every pageview like user agent, screen resolution etc and then try to stitch it back together. Trying to figure out how many different users there are. But th…

> and it is bad for everybody Hang on, it's not bad for me . If I visit your site, it's not because I want to participate in some kind of A/B testing (whose results you'll never tell me about). And if your site only works if I happen to have hardware X installed, you don't need analytics to tell you that your site is broken. > European companies need to bug all users and beg for cookies. That's nonsense. If cookies a…

If you paid for said site, sure.

If you didn't pay, I'm not sure why you feel entitled to anything.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#220

Post by dylan604 »

oh_sigh wrote: post #216
dylan604 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. How could you have known it would be used for what's it's used for now. That's the entire point of the conversation someone from the future could tell you. Why is that unclear? Maybe you're assuming a negative conversation? There are many decisions in my life that if a future me or someone else could show me exactly how things will play out in ways not foreseen by me at the time, I'd be less hostile than you…

This is such a ludicrous comment chain. The tone was clearly negative. You said you said you wanted to have a chat "about needing to envision longer term visions for how nefarious people can be".

right, but it sounds to me as you are reading it as i'm calling the inventor of the cookie as nefarious. i'm suggesting having a conversation with the inventor about how nefarious people will use his invention.
Post reply on HN