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

81–90 of 227 posts

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

#81

Post by Dah00n »

cheschire wrote: post #71
needle0 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To Firefox only. Switching to Brave does not improve the Chromium engine hegemony.

Why does it matter if the underlying engine is shared amongst multiple browsers?

Because as it is now Chrome (read: Google) can dictate how the web works and they do. If you use a Chromium based browser everything just works and happy people doesnt often complain or see the problems. So using something Chromium based makes you part of the problem. Apple isn't much better though so there aren't many options left...

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

#82

Post by maccard »

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

My last isp used to to cycle ip addresses at 1am every night. The modem would disconnect and reconnect every device on the network.

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

#83

Post by Dah00n »

pdimitar wrote: post #61
guywhocodes wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yes. Often times pages load very slowly, we're talking 5-8 seconds. I am on a gigabit connection (yes, that doesn't guarantee that my ISP has fast access to that particular page, I know) and Chrome is always loading those pages at least twice as fast. Can't describe it perfectly. The UI is responsive but page loading is just severely slowed down -- not always but often. I have a bunch of privacy extensions but again,…

How did you end up at the conclusion that it is Firefox that is the problem and not one of the add-ons? Or maybe you didn't? Some add-ons can do less in Chromium based browsers than in Firefox. Are you sure this isn't what you are seeing instead? Like slower DNS because of add-on settings or bigger block lists?

FYI I'm asking, not doubting or blaming or whatever.

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

#84

Post by cheschire »

Dah00n wrote: post #81
cheschire wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it matter if the underlying engine is shared amongst multiple browsers?

Because as it is now Chrome (read: Google) can dictate how the web works and they do. If you use a Chromium based browser everything just works and happy people doesnt often complain or see the problems. So using something Chromium based makes you part of the problem. Apple isn't much better though so there aren't many options left...

What prevents forks of chromium from sharing amongst each other? I don't think google can gatekeep to the extent you seem to be implying. I'm pretty sure Brave and Opera and MS Edge can share changes they've made amongst each other without going through the original repository first.

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

#85

Post by pjerem »

cheschire wrote: post #71
needle0 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To Firefox only. Switching to Brave does not improve the Chromium engine hegemony.

Why does it matter if the underlying engine is shared amongst multiple browsers?

Because it creates a web that is not meant to work following a standard but to work on only one engine.

What this means is that this engine becomes the de facto standard of the web and this standard is controlled by the main contributor of the engine.

Every browser is now constrained by Google's own decision about what should the web be. Sure, they could technically disagree by forking WebKit/Blink, but since websites are made to work with Blink, a disagreement means being incompatible with such websites.

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

#86

Post by grishka »

FranchuFranchu wrote: post #10

> Nonetheless, the ad industry — which co-opted foundational internet technologies like the cookie and the IP address into means of identifying people online How can you have an Internet without using IP addresses? Do you just use Onion routing all the time?

That's the question I ask every time I see the phrase "we receive your IP address". Of course you do, that's how the internet works.

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

#87

Post by Santosh83 »

cheschire wrote: post #71
needle0 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To Firefox only. Switching to Brave does not improve the Chromium engine hegemony.

Why does it matter if the underlying engine is shared amongst multiple browsers?

Because if Google decide to make a user hostile change to the engine (Chromium), because everyone consolidated on one engine, now there will be no alternative. The only recourse would be to maintain patchsets or forks, which could be increasingly infeasible from an architectural standpoint, especially from smaller authors.

One way or another, browsers are heading towards engine homogeny (or hegemony), but Firefox and Safari are at least slowing this process down to some extent.

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

#88

Post by Duralias »

simias wrote: post #21
FranchuFranchu wrote: post #10

> Nonetheless, the ad industry — which co-opted foundational internet technologies like the cookie and the IP address into means of identifying people online How can you have an Internet without using IP addresses? Do you just use Onion routing all the time?

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.

In Sweden every single ISP I've used in the last 10+ years have had CG-NAT, I absolutely hate it because it stops me from self-hosting, but on the upside if the app/website is only using my IP-adress to track my location then I am apparently in one of the largest cities in Sweden, that is also 2+ hours away from me. However, most apps don't only use IP-addresses so it really doesn't balance out.

For you that don't live in small countries being 2 hours away in Sweden means you have to pass several other independent cities on your way there.

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

#89

Post by pdimitar »

Dah00n wrote: post #83
pdimitar wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Often times pages load very slowly, we're talking 5-8 seconds. I am on a gigabit connection (yes, that doesn't guarantee that my ISP has fast access to that particular page, I know) and Chrome is always loading those pages at least twice as fast. Can't describe it perfectly. The UI is responsive but page loading is just severely slowed down -- not always but often. I have a bunch of privacy extensions but again,…

How did you end up at the conclusion that it is Firefox that is the problem and not one of the add-ons? Or maybe you didn't? Some add-ons can do less in Chromium based browsers than in Firefox. Are you sure this isn't what you are seeing instead? Like slower DNS because of add-on settings or bigger block lists? FYI I'm asking, not doubting or blaming or whatever.

I have no clue if that's the case hence I am not blaming only the browser or only the extensions. It's most likely a combination of both.

But the fact remains that I installed 100% the same set of extensions on Chrome and it loads pages at least 2X faster.

I might be a programmer, I might care about putting a rod in Google's giant personal-info-gathering machine, and all that good stuff that makes us feel we're making a difference in the world -- but when 1/3 of all my pages load more slowly in Firefox, I can tolerate this only for so long.

So I don't really know which factor is the real page load speed detractor. I just wish the Firefox team fixes it.

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

#90

Post by beervirus »

pengwing wrote: post #53

Oh, no! This means I might still get relevant ads that relate to my unique interests as an individual instead of some least common denominator cookie cutter garbage ad.

I personally love having my personal information taken without my permission, by code running on my device and wasting my battery, so that some company can show me ads I’m never going to click on.
Post reply on HN