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

Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

donttrack.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 178 posts

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#71

Post by axod »

epi0Bauqu wrote: post #67
axod wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The average person doesn't know it exists" Is there any evidence to suggest the average person really cares about privacy online to such an extent?

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/12/21/web-surfers-troubled-...

Yeah I'd take that with a giant pinch of salt.

"90% of respondents said they pay little or no attention to online ads."

eg the respondents are in no way a representative sample.

It also sounds like an entirely loaded poll - eg "Would you like more ability to opt out of online tracking".... "um... yes? I guess".

There's so much FUD around the issue - "should advertising networks be allowed to target products to you based on tracking". The term 'tracking' sounds bad. It sounds like they are monitoring everything you do, when in fact they're just storing a cookie and noticing which other sites you visit that also carry ads from the same network.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#72

Post by epi0Bauqu »

axod wrote: post #71
epi0Bauqu wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/12/21/web-surfers-troubled-...

Yeah I'd take that with a giant pinch of salt. "90% of respondents said they pay little or no attention to online ads." eg the respondents are in no way a representative sample. It also sounds like an entirely loaded poll - eg "Would you like more ability to opt out of online tracking".... "um... yes? I guess". There's so much FUD around the issue - "should advertising networks be allowed to target products to you ba…

I don't think that statement renders the poll invalid. That is to say, I think 90% of people in general would say they pay little or no attention to online ads.

But more generally, I don't know if there is any poll that would satisfy you. I've been watching you make these comments for years :).

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#74

Post by mike-cardwell »

16s wrote: post #66
motters wrote: post #62

I've been using DDG for a while, and have been very happy with it. IMHO they should focus on this privacy aspect, trying to be the most privacy respecting search engine, because it's a key product differentiator and it's also an issue which is only likely to grow in importance.

How will they make money? I agree with you. I like privacy, but ad supported search seems to be the only viable business model. Advertisers won't pay DDG b/c there's no one to target.

I assume they have various methods. One of the methods I noticed by accident was that they add their affiliate id to Amazon links in search results

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#75

Post by jimmyswimmy »

Well, that finally worked for me. For the longest time I've seen the DDG "ads" on here and thought, "meh, Google works fine for me." Focusing on the privacy angle appealed to me, mainly because I like the idea of decoupling my search and email histories.

But - if you are so focused on not-tracking then how do you know if an advertising campaign such as this actually works? Presumably this is not the only campaign you are currently running. Must be the referrer string from donttrack.us, which is so amusingly ironic that I can't help but twist the corner of my mouth into a smirk.

Nice site, by the way, I found it clean, clear and readable. Scrolling and justification are no matter to me, I liked the simple single-page look.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#76

Post by axod »

epi0Bauqu wrote: post #72
axod wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I'd take that with a giant pinch of salt. "90% of respondents said they pay little or no attention to online ads." eg the respondents are in no way a representative sample. It also sounds like an entirely loaded poll - eg "Would you like more ability to opt out of online tracking".... "um... yes? I guess". There's so much FUD around the issue - "should advertising networks be allowed to target products to you ba…

I don't think that statement renders the poll invalid. That is to say, I think 90% of people in general would say they pay little or no attention to online ads. But more generally, I don't know if there is any poll that would satisfy you. I've been watching you make these comments for years :).

heh true, true.

I think generally though, a very very vocal minority make a ton of noise about privacy.

Look at adblock. If you were a newcomer to the net and just read comments here or at reddit, you'd assume everyone uses it. But the figure is more like 1 or 2% at most have adblock or similar installed.

There's this big elitist movement that supposes that only idiots click on adverts, that they only click because they're confused, that adverts are all bad and irritating. But there's no real evidence to back that up.

Nearly everyone clicks on adverts. Nearly everyone buys stuff as a result. Consumers find stuff via adverts, Sellers sell stuff via adverts. They work.

I appreciate what you're trying to do though, and hope it does pay off for you, the time is right for some google competition.

I'd be satisfied I'm wrong if adblock usage jumped to 50%+ or if more than a few thousand people used Tor or whatever the usual figure is (extremely low).

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#77

Post by brudgers »

Ryan_IRL wrote: post #4

I think it's some valid info here, and it's certainly worth being wary of the info Google collects, but I also sense a little bit of FUD here. The whole "...which can often uniquely identify you" makes me feel like this is playing on fear a little too much. It's not like that "big ebony booty" search is going to come up in a job interview any time soon guys.

>"...which can often uniquely identify you" makes me feel like this is playing on fear a little too much.

A browser signature is somewhat akin to a physical finger print.

https://panopticlick.eff.org/

bigebonybooty.com can sell your data too.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#79

Post by Matt_Cutts »

brudgers wrote: post #70
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #35

The first sentence when I stripped out the pictures was "When you search Google, and click on a link, your search term is sent to that site, along with your browser & computer info, which can often uniquely identify you." Referrers are a part of the way the web has worked since before Google existed. They're a browser-level feature more than something related to specific websites. But if referrers bother you, just us…

If SSL was the default and sending headers was opt-in, it would probably add some weight to your argument. What Google actively promotes to the typical web user, however, is not SSL or anonymous search but rather features that collect user data to an ever greater degree, e.g. Toolbar, Instant Search, and the Chrome browser.

SSL adds latency, because you're setting up an encrypted connection. Google hates slowing down users, and we don't want to slow down every user unless it's a clear win. That's one reason.

When Google switched to AJAX-based search, that temporarily stopped sending referrers, and lots of people screamed bloody murder. For example, http://getclicky.com/blog/150/googles-new-ajax-powered-searc... said "So what can we do about it? If you run a blog, write about this. Submit this story or your own story to large tech blogs like TechCrunch, CenterNetworks, ReadWriteWeb, GigaOm, etc - no large site has written about this yet, and one of them needs to. ... Do anything you can to spread the word and let Google know that this is not acceptable."

Or see http://www.seobook.com/Ad-Networks-Partners-Hoarding-Publish... or http://econsultancy.com/us/blog/3240-google-ajax-bad-news-fo... or http://blogs.sitepoint.com/2009/02/04/google-update-breaks-t... . So we heard lots of complaints.

SSL as an option provides a nice choice for people who care about these issues and don't mind taking a tiny hit in latency.

Re: Google tracks you. We don't. An illustrated guide

#80

Post by brudgers »

danielhfrank wrote: post #43

Could anyone comment on how much of this stuff could be sidestepped by just using an incognito window in Chrome? I don't mind ads targeted to, say, me as a Java developer. But, if I'm going to look up anything I'd rather others not know about, I simply pop open an incognito window and... am I good to go? Is there anything besides my IP address that can be read when I'm doing that?

Chrome sends keystrokes typed into the address/search bar directly to Google.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/03/microsoft-goog...

Post reply on HN