451–460 of 473 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not take a screenshot of the CF error and send it to the website owner? It would freak me out if I thought a significant number of my website's users were being blocked by CF.
How do you send them that when you can't access the contact form and/or contact information on their site because Cloudflare blocks it? (assuming a normal visitor, not someone who knows about whois etc.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a handful: - 7f395b5ddfe43a54 - 7f395ca09bfa3a54 - 7f395d8afaf73a54 - 7f395f075e33690d - 7f396102afef35fd
Thanks for the examples! Would you be able to share browser and extension information with me? If you don't want to share publicly I've dropped my email in this thread.
Any time a large portion of internet traffic is controlled by a single source it brings problems like this with it. All cloudflare has to do is arbitrarily decide who and who can't use the internet and effectively their word becomes law. Like most things it starts with an innocent premise (e.g. "an easy way to stop bad actors") and ends up extended to any number of arbitrary things. Worse, the argument from privacy a…
Everyone forgets that websites become almost unusable because of crawlers and bots. Website owners specifically choose for cloudflare to protect against this, it's not forced upon them by cloudflare.
No one "forgets" this because it isn't true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a pretty good idea. Do you randomly sample, or just exclude some domains? Is there some tool out there that does it for you?
Assembling the list of links to archive is a manual process--I just log them in an Obsidian notebook with a category and summary, and I later post it to my blog. (I don't really think other people care, it's more for me to be able to find past things I've found interesting.) For the archival process I use ArchiveBox[1] running as a container on my NAS; I just grep through the note for `http|https` and feed the result…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No need to simplify so much that only false dichotomies remain. My brain might be wired up differently but its capacity for nuance and reason is fully intact :) No one is forcing the website owners to sign up with Cloudflare to enable this service with these aggressive configurations, and yet I understand why they would even just pre-emptively. It's cheap and effective, there's no denying that. It is Cloudflare Inc.…
I'm pretty sure anyone who deploys aggressive cloudflare DDOS protection knows the impact and believes it's the lesser evil. If there was just as effective a way to tell cheap bots from legitimate browsers without making users wait I'm pretty sure it would have been used.
Things aren't set in stone either. The most effective method to communicate over long distances used to be carrier pigeons, but only because they hadn't yet invented the telegraph.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the idea is they're abusing existing APIs for fingerprinting purposes that Firefox privacy settings disallow --canvas font rendering difference detection, detecting your GPU model, and things of that nature. But this new API demonstrates that Google is not on the consumers side when it comes to limiting tracking/data gathering ability, as the new API is explicitly for fingerprinting.
I thought it was the opposite: that instead of fingerprinting users, web services would instead just ask the browser which topics the user is interested in and display the relevant ADs. It's an explicit design goal to reduce the dependence on fingerprinting users, otherwise why would they do it. Topics are supposed to be the locally sourced privacy preserving alternative to invasive tracking. Whether Mozilla/Apple/ot…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Browsers don’t do that today and the result is that AD networks fingerprint and track you to try and serve you more relevant content. The argument from supporters is that this is a step away from the “fingerprint and track” status quo MO. The argument from detractors is that it doesn't quite achieve that goal. All you need to address your concern is for access to the API to be user-configurable.
Anyone who believes that ad networks won't continue to do fingerprinting in addition to whatever privacy leaks Chrome adds is a fool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m no Google fanboy but I wasn’t satisfied with this: > Chrome will happily collect as much private information about me and my browsing history and share them with select parties, as needed What information does Chrome provide in this scenario that Firefox doesn’t? It feels like backward logic: it worked in Chrome therefore it must be because Chrome gave extra info. In reality it could be a whole bunch of things, s…
https://privacytests.org/ shows some good data what each browser lets through/exposes for websites.
The site that morjom posted gives you a simple overview and Firefox is known for the privacy preserving features it comes with. However, you are right, that it is an inexact science as long as we don't know the logic of the Cloudflare implementation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you visited many stores since 2020? There was an event around that time. I still today wear a mask in every store I enter and I can completely honestly say that I have never gotten a weird look from staff over it; it's never been a problem.
> I still today wear a mask in every store I enter But why.
----
More seriously (and more relevantly), in the context of the current conversation about privacy and user autonomy, the correct answer to "why do you need to be able to do X" should usually be, "that's none of your business."
"Why do you need to run a VPN?" None of your business. "Why do you need to wear a mask?" None of your business. "Why do you have WebGL disabled?" None of your business. "Why does your browser not have this font installed?" None of your business.
A big part of autonomy and agency is that you don't need to ask permission or justify to anybody why you're doing the things you have agency to do. If you need to explain then it's not autonomy, it's permission. I don't feel I need anyone's permission to wear a mask indoors in a public space regardless of my reasoning (and in practice I'm never asked to explain, millage may vary but my experience is that nobody really cares). And similarly I shouldn't need Cloudflare's permission to run an obscure browser or to customize my computer setup.