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

I don't think you browse like I do

blog.microco.sm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#41

Post by cypherpunks01 »

I use Chrome's Vanilla Cookie Manager extension to continually throw out ALL cookies older than 30 minutes, except for the following which are saved over browsing sessions: (star).google.com, (star).workflowy.com, news.ycombinator.com

It works really well, and I don't have to go through the hassle of using two browsers. Additionally not accepting 3rd party cookies and using http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ for ads. Not quite as secure as OP, but mostly does the job.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/gieohaicffldbmiilo...

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#42

Post by RandallBrown »

joedev wrote: post #36

Everyone who think's David's post was about privacy and information security didn't read it very closely. He said at multiple times that the purpose is because he wants to keep out of "personalized bubbles", wants to have a broader view of web content and to avoid sites changing "some state because it knew who I was". It has nothing to do with what will happen to his browsing habit information or with dislike of bein…

it seems like a lot of effort to go through just for the off chance that an ad will show you something unexpectedly interesting. It seems like Reddit or Pinterest or even your Facebook friends would be better for that kind of stuff.

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#43

Post by zalew »

Nic0 wrote: post #34
zalew wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> After all, Google is a company, here to make money. Those bastards... and they force you to sign in for their email and g+ and picasa and.. oh, wait. Maybe I'll sound like a wierdo, but you can always opt out of using google at all and block them with ghostery or hosts. Problem solved. Let's be honest with ourselves and admit that data is the currency we pay for 'free' online services, and if we don't like the serv…

>> After all, Google is a company, here to make money. >Those bastards... and they force you to sign in for their email and g+ and picasa and.. oh, wait. I haven't said that making money was bad, it's business, and that's the risk to know where is the interest. Sure you signed, but silly me, I wasn't thinking about all this when I first sign-up for Gmail, and sure as well I could resign, but meanwhile they collected…

> It doesn't surprise me, his post sounds to me more like an easy "don't be evil" troll.

yeah. He even made private browsing sound hackish with about:config while this option is a checkbox in preferences

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#46

Post by tete »

Google tells me I don't have a cookie, which is a bit strange because I allow cookies. Anyway, looks like Google knows nothing about me either.

I know a lot of things that could cause this, even tough I tried a few things it's hard to figure out why Google isn't profiling me.

Is it maybe the DNT header, any of the disabled Javascript or the EasyPricacy list of APB? Maybe Spybot blocks something. Is there a way to opt-out for this? Maybe I never opted in? Anyone got an idea?

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#47

Post by bryanh »

Katelyn wrote: post #29

You are right. I don't browse like you do. That would take forever. I wonder: Are you afraid Google is sitting at home drooling over the fact that you bought your shoes from JcPenny? You’re not a name, you’re not a face, you’re a knode. a cookie. literally, a number in trillions of records. Secondly, you sit on the web writing openly about privacy issues, while overtly displaying your information on those "Identity t…

I disagree with this comment: "are you afraid Google is sitting at home drooling over the fact that you bought your shoes from JcPenny?"

I'm sure Google doesn't consciously care, but the fact that they track it it can seriously screw you if in the wrong hands. Further, at risk of building a strawman, it sounds a bit to similar to "what do you have to hide?" which is wrong on many many levels.

Given plenty of data it would be easy to cherry pick information useful enough to cast some serious suspicion of a crime. People have been convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. Is it really the lay person's responsibility to worry about this?

A silly example: "Where were you at 9:35pm the 3rd of June, 2011?" ... "I was having dinner and drinks with friends" ... "Really? According to documents obtained by the prosecution you bought shoes that night online at 9:29pm from JCPenney" ... "Oh, I guess I left earlier than I thought" ... "Court, clearly the defendant is lying about his whereabouts".

/paranoia

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#48

Post by buro9 »

Katelyn wrote: post #29

You are right. I don't browse like you do. That would take forever. I wonder: Are you afraid Google is sitting at home drooling over the fact that you bought your shoes from JcPenny? You’re not a name, you’re not a face, you’re a knode. a cookie. literally, a number in trillions of records. Secondly, you sit on the web writing openly about privacy issues, while overtly displaying your information on those "Identity t…

I replied to you on the blog but since you cross-posted:

@Katelyn, I think you misunderstand the purpose.

It’s not a paranoia thing to prevent companies recording information, instead it’s a preference for how I like to consume the web. The companies are free to record whatever they wish, they do so by my user of their service. But I’m free to choose how my client consumes their service.

I just prefer web sites that aren’t updating state based on me just reading things.

I like to see opposing sides of the argument, so don’t like the idea of being bubbled by my own preferences.

I feel a little freaked out when one cycling site I go on has adverts for the tyres I looked at 2 weeks ago on an entirely unconnected web site.

Personalisation can get it wrong. In the same way that Amazon recommendations become tainted every December when you do the Christmas shop.

And personalisation can be extremely upsetting, such as a family member who still receives new born baby information months after a miscarriage.

It just comes back to how I use the web.

I enjoy it more when it’s made up of many disconnected things giving a consistent experience to the user... me.

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#49

Post by tjoff »

Jach wrote: post #38
Nic0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the problem is what do they actually do with all those data, but what could happen with it. You can't be sure that in few years, they will use data for something else that ads, something that you're not agree, but meanwhile data are collected. You can't be sure what could happen with Google's data in 5 or 10 years. Sold ? After all, Google is a company, here to make money. Or even some weird law, allow…

> I don't think the problem is what do they actually do with all those data, but what could happen with it. This is FUD, plain and simple. While I don't advocate sticking one's head in the sand and refusing to predict or even speculate, it's easy to do too much predicting and speculating (and very prone to bias), it's easy to spread paranoia, and it's no basis for living a life and especially it's no way to decide mo…

You admit that there is a risk, but what can you gain from taking that risk? Because without gain, what incentive to you have to take the risk? Yes, I agree that the likely outcome isn't that bad if they break my trust but only tracking my search queries would be quite revealing and sensitive and would reveal stuff that I tell very few people. So, the thing that yahoo did (releasing all queries with an "anonymous" user ID) could have had huge implications for me personally.

In terms of friendship etc. the gains are huge, but what about google?

Relevant ads? I have never, ever, in my life clicked on a google ad on purpose (probably a few by mistake (thus I immediately left the page)). And that despite that they are "relevant", so... What can I gain from letting google collect all that information about me?

And honestly I believe you get much better ads by targeting a site rather than a person. The best ads and the only ads I've ever positively responded to are those from a local tech site (the same ads but on a food site would probably not interest me as much).

Re: I don't think you browse like I do

#50

Post by GnarlinBrando »

Google has no interests or demographics for me and I do not go nearly as far as this article suggests. I use adblock, wallflower, and antisocial extensions, as well as the do not track feature of firefox. But I am constantly signed in to gmail, frequently in amazon, and other places. Use firefox for all my browsing and don't really worry about it. If anyone wants to get information on me I am sure there are many more ways to get it than google anyway. While I like my privacy I have to accept that in this day and age it is relatively easy to find information about someone.
Post reply on HN