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

261–270 of 273 posts

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#261

Post by jalk »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #254
jalk wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems a bit overkill to recompile to get "no third party cookies by default" when you can just open the settings and disable it when you first install the browser. The setting is kept between updates (in Firefox at least) and if you are paranoid you can always check with Dev tools or a dumping proxy that 3rd party cookies are still disabled after an update

This undervalues convenience. The convenience of not having to worry about privacy-hostile default settings. Also, this will not work where the user is running applications from read-only media, or using something like "Guest mode" on a Chromebook where changes to settings are either not possible or ephemeral. This sort of argument in defense of so-called "tech" company "default settings" shenanigans has been called…

You originally wrote:

> Some popular browsers are supposedly "open source" yet it appears no browser user longing for saner times has ever tried reversed this change and recompiling the browser for their own use. No third party cookies by default.

And my response was simply it's way easier for the vast majority of people to change a setting once, than compiling the source (and remember to stay up to date with new releases)

> What I do know is that most users do not change default settings.

And they don't install alternative privacy respecting browsers either.

(edit for layout)

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#262

Post by eternityforest »

todd8 wrote: post #177

My spouse will sometimes mention in conversation with others that I invented the cookie. This always puts me on the spot, and I have to enter into a long explanation of the what and the why of cookies least they believe that I some sort of evil software hacker. (Now for a short explanation so that HN readers don’t think that I’m an evil hacker: I invented them, with the help of a colleague, while at IBM where we were…

That's such a cool story! I'm very glad cookies are a thing that exists, regardless of any bad uses they might have.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#263

Post by quickthrower2 »

cooperadymas wrote: post #222
dylan604 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, so when time travel becomes a thing, I'll add you to the list of people to have a chat with about needing to envision longer term visions for how nefarious people can be. I love that at one point in a not so distant galaxy, er time, that there was a thing of innocence. Now, that innocence can no longer be tolerated and every new thing must have more time invested on how the new thing can be abused rather than…

You may as well start by having that conversation with the inventor of the time travel device you're using, because - whew boy the nefarious things people are going to do with it!

Just as amazing are people who are not travelling through time.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#264

Post by eternityforest »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #250
reaperman wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of us remember when cookies were purely a utility-add for end users and were restricted only to the domain which set them. Thanks for inventing that.

Who can take credit for lifting that restriction. Some popular browsers are supposedly "open source" yet it appears no browser user longing for saner times has ever tried reversed this change and recompiling the browser for their own use. No third party cookies by default . The most fascinating thing IMO about so-called "modern" browsers is that even when their vendors publish source code, "99.9%" of people will not…

Browsers need a lot of updates. No way I'd want to touch a single line of code in a browser. Somehow, something is going to break and I'll have to screw with it at an inconvenient time no matter how clever my auto update script is.

There's lots of stuff I'd like to change, but I am not wading through the nightmare pile of code to add mdns browsing and SyncThing bookmark sync.

It's too bad most apps are getting rid of true scriptability. Browsers would be way better if you could just drop a python file in a folder and change stuff.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#265

Post by mediascreen »

novok wrote: post #180
mediascreen wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Law enforcement tracking everyone can have serious and unintended consequences in away that a SaaS tracking visits are unlikely to have. An extreme case is on the other side, is to compare simple site limited tracking to a coffee shop being able to see who enters the door. Why should they track how I look and the way I'm dressed? Does it make service harder if you have to work blindfolded? Though luck, my privacy is…

On it's face it is harder for baristas to be blindfolded. It would literally be a worse coffee shop at blindfolded baristas than normal coffee.

Yes, but that's my point. A large number of companies uses analytics data to provide better service and products without any sinister motives.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#266

Post by phendrenad2 »

jhpacker wrote: post #173
phendrenad2 wrote: post #47

94% of people want me to be president. Caveat: I did not define what it means for them to want me to be president. In other words, what does it mean to be "tracked"? How was the question worded? You can change this value from 1% all the way up to 99% depending on how you ask the question, because "being tracked" is open to interpretation. Truly a useless poll.

Hi, the exact wording on the poll was "If given the option, I would prefer not to be tracked online." The reason why I didn't define "tracked" for the people taking the poll is that I think that's the most representative way to replicate the question that consent boxes are theoretical asking, but in an abstract way out of the context of a specific website. When a user sees that consent box, they have little to no ide…

Hmm, I guess that's a good rationale, but unfortunately it's still useless. I believe that websites adopted the simplistic "don't track me" language because they want to appear to be embracing the law. I've asked a lot of people (> 100) what it means to them to be "tracked" and they have no idea what it means, but they're afraid of whatever it means.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#267

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

jalk wrote: post #261
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This undervalues convenience. The convenience of not having to worry about privacy-hostile default settings. Also, this will not work where the user is running applications from read-only media, or using something like "Guest mode" on a Chromebook where changes to settings are either not possible or ephemeral. This sort of argument in defense of so-called "tech" company "default settings" shenanigans has been called…

You originally wrote: > Some popular browsers are supposedly "open source" yet it appears no browser user longing for saner times has ever tried reversed this change and recompiling the browser for their own use. No third party cookies by default. And my response was simply it's way easier for the vast majority of people to change a setting once, than compiling the source (and remember to stay up to date with new rel…

The "vast majority of people" will neither find nor change settings. Ever.

They are not interested in computers and they certainly do not read and comment on HN.

When I use the term "browser user" in the quoted comment it can be assumed I am referring to browser users who can write/edit and compile source code. If I wanted to address or comment about a larger audience, including people who are not interested in computers, who do not read HN, i.e., "the vast majority of people", then I would not be commenting here.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#268

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

eternityforest wrote: post #264
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who can take credit for lifting that restriction. Some popular browsers are supposedly "open source" yet it appears no browser user longing for saner times has ever tried reversed this change and recompiling the browser for their own use. No third party cookies by default . The most fascinating thing IMO about so-called "modern" browsers is that even when their vendors publish source code, "99.9%" of people will not…

Browsers need a lot of updates. No way I'd want to touch a single line of code in a browser. Somehow, something is going to break and I'll have to screw with it at an inconvenient time no matter how clever my auto update script is. There's lots of stuff I'd like to change, but I am not wading through the nightmare pile of code to add mdns browsing and SyncThing bookmark sync. It's too bad most apps are getting rid of…

The text-only browser I use does not need updates. I am able to script it via tmux.

Overall I think "browsers" are overextended and overrated. I use them as HTML readers. I prefer separate programs for different tasks instead of one program for every task.

The so-called "modern" web browser, a "nightmare pile of code" indeed.

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#269

Post by ff317 »

snthd wrote: post #240
ff317 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying it's easy or perfect, but Wikipedia does tracker-less analytics, and yet still produces https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/all-projects . We do use cookies for part of the analysis, but they're not unique user-tracking cookies. Instead there's one that simply tracks a self-reported datestamp on when the user last visited, which looks something like: WMF-Last-Access=2023-01-01,Expires=Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:00:…

>which send back info on the hashes of the 10 most recent URLs you've visited on the site, IIRC. None of them are unique tracker hashes for a given user, though. That seems highly unlikely to never be unique for some users.

The hash is keyed and rotates once a day, so it's not a long-term history. And in any case, nobody's trying to build a unique tracker out of it on the other end, which is the main thing (even in our internal analytics, we even throw away the PII we get directly from request attributes after 90 days).

Re: Who wants to be tracked?

#270

Post by gwern »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #45
isoprophlex wrote: post #9

94% don't want tracking... and the remainder 6% of responses can be attributed to the lizardman constant https://gwern.net/note/lizardman

Heard this called flatlining. I.e. answer all "mostly agree" or whatever.

'acquiescence bias' is real but a different thing. Mischievous responders will flip their answer as necessary to screw with you, they don't just 'go down the line', so you can't simply reverse-code or use other such tricks.
Post reply on HN