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

Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

digiday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 227 posts

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#51

Post by drunner »

pdimitar wrote: post #46
pmurt7 wrote: post #27

We need to collectively switch to Firefox and Brave.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

Well, that's part of the issue. On macOS, all browsers are just skins over Safari. Google obviously has more resources to make this work better but I agree, overall I always found Chrome better than Firefox on macOS.

You can't really compare that to a native linux/windows experience.

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#52

Post by alias_neo »

smichel17 wrote: post #23
simias wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VPNs (aka proxies) can also help. I think most ISPs (at least where I live) also use dynamic IPs which reduces the utility if IP for tracking somewhat. I think cookie + browser fingerprinting is a much better way to track people in this situation, because it removes the uncertainty associated with dynamic IPs and multiple users behind a NAT.

My home has a nominally dynamic ip (from Comcast), but I've only ever seen it change when the modem gets power cycled

This is quite typical. When I was younger and needed my IP changed, I'd simply power cycle my router.

Newer ISPs use CGNAT so you'll be sharing your public IP with a few neighbours (7+you in the case of my ISP).

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#54

Post by pdimitar »

drunner wrote: post #51
pdimitar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

Well, that's part of the issue. On macOS, all browsers are just skins over Safari. Google obviously has more resources to make this work better but I agree, overall I always found Chrome better than Firefox on macOS. You can't really compare that to a native linux/windows experience.

Wait what?! I thought this only applied to iOS / iPadOS.

You're telling me Firefox under macOS is using Safari's engine? If so, wow. Extremely disappointing.

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#55

Post by guywhocodes »

pdimitar wrote: post #46
pmurt7 wrote: post #27

We need to collectively switch to Firefox and Brave.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

What is it that is slow, are you on OS X?

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#56

Post by pdimitar »

eingaeKaiy8ujie wrote: post #50
pdimitar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

Not sure if this would help in your case but try to enable `gfx.webrender.all` or `layers.acceleration.force-enabled` in `about:config` if it's not already enabled.

Only the second one was disabled, enabled it. Thanks for the tip!

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#57

Post by anthonyvd »

pdimitar wrote: post #54
drunner wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's part of the issue. On macOS, all browsers are just skins over Safari. Google obviously has more resources to make this work better but I agree, overall I always found Chrome better than Firefox on macOS. You can't really compare that to a native linux/windows experience.

Wait what?! I thought this only applied to iOS / iPadOS. You're telling me Firefox under macOS is using Safari's engine? If so, wow. Extremely disappointing.

No, the parent is incorrect. This is only true on iOS/iPadOS.

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#58

Post by rpy »

drunner wrote: post #51
pdimitar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

Well, that's part of the issue. On macOS, all browsers are just skins over Safari. Google obviously has more resources to make this work better but I agree, overall I always found Chrome better than Firefox on macOS. You can't really compare that to a native linux/windows experience.

You’re thinking of iOS. On macOS third party browsers can and do implement their own browser engines. Firefox is not running on WebKit.

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#59

Post by svieira »

drunner wrote: post #51
pdimitar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

Well, that's part of the issue. On macOS, all browsers are just skins over Safari. Google obviously has more resources to make this work better but I agree, overall I always found Chrome better than Firefox on macOS. You can't really compare that to a native linux/windows experience.

On macOS all browsers are distinct engines, just like on Windows and Linux (yes, and on Open/Free BSD, Haiku, etc. I see you). It's on iOS that all browsers must be skins over Safari.

Re: Ad tech firms test ways to connect Google’s FLoC to other data

#60

Post by Idiot211 »

drunner wrote: post #51
pdimitar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on Firefox for a few years now and it irritates me how super slow it is. Version 89 seems to be a bit better though. I know it might be the extensions (I have 20+) but I seriously don't care. Chrome manages to be fast with the same set of extensions. I don't like Google but Firefox's slowness is a real strain on my productivity and brain well-being. Hope they improve even more soon. I am on an iMac Pro btw.…

Well, that's part of the issue. On macOS, all browsers are just skins over Safari. Google obviously has more resources to make this work better but I agree, overall I always found Chrome better than Firefox on macOS. You can't really compare that to a native linux/windows experience.

That certainly doesn't seem quite right, have you got any sources for this?
Post reply on HN