3 ms·

I run uBlock Origin and I block third party cookies. Because screw trackers and spammy ads.

by xdinomode 11y ago

voltagex_ 11y ago
Unfortunately you're blocking people self-hosting piwik.js too.
- stan_rogers 11y ago
  Well, isn't that a bummer. I'd block it manually if it weren't blocked automatically since it uses my resources (including, but not limited to, simply requesting and downloading the file) to do things the server ought to be doing at its own end. And no, you don't need to be more granular than that.
  - manigandham 11y ago
    That comes across as quite an entitled attitude. It's not really using your resources, that's the package deal for the site. And there are plenty of reasons for granular data - or do you claim to know every use case and rule over the internet?
    - icebraining 11y ago
      There is no package deal for websites. I know website owners really wish there was, but it's just that - wishful thinking. Maybe for sites which require registration (and hence explicitly accepting terms) that could be argued, but there's certainly no implicit agreement to download and process all the stuff the site is offering to the browser. And "entitled" is just a lazy insult.
  - voltagex_ 11y ago
    Shit, do you block Mustache/Handlebars too because it's using your resources to render a template? That's quite a reductive argument - you get to the point where you don't turn the computer on because it's using your electricity.
    - blumkvist 11y ago
      Yes. please! voltagex_, do you and webmasters a favor and stop using a computer!
    - icebraining 11y ago
      You know, quite a lot of us do use NoScript, so that reduction to absurd is not really that effective. As for using electricity, that's why stan_rogers added the caveat of "do things the server ought to be doing at its own end".
- frik 11y ago
  Why are first-party analytics like pwiki blocked? They are the good guys... it's like reading the server log, except you get also the screen resolution and a few more infos. I don't mind if a website owner gets that stats for himself. What I (and a growing number of people) mind is that huge corporations collect that stats and then track me down and crunch the data to show me "personalised ads" (of products I already bought) and categorise as a person of interest group XY and then selling that data including my email address to evil spammer YZ.
  - pdkl95 11y ago
    > except you get also the screen resolution and a few more infos. It is quite the sense of entitlement to think you have a right to that information. You have a right to log what people ask you (the server logs); logging anything more just makes you a creepy peeping-tom. > I don't mind That's nice. That doesn't mean everybody else agrees. You're right, in general - it is the aggregation at Google (et al) that is the real problem. My point is that it is highly presumptuous to assume everybody is ok with a particular type of logging.

I run uBlock Origin and I block third party cookies. Because screw trackers and spammy ads.

voltagex_ 11y ago

Unfortunately you're blocking people self-hosting piwik.js too.

stan_rogers 11y ago
Well, isn't that a bummer. I'd block it manually if it weren't blocked automatically since it uses my resources (including, but not limited to, simply requesting and downloading the file) to do things the server ought to be doing at its own end. And no, you don't need to be more granular than that.
- manigandham 11y ago
  That comes across as quite an entitled attitude. It's not really using your resources, that's the package deal for the site. And there are plenty of reasons for granular data - or do you claim to know every use case and rule over the internet?
  - icebraining 11y ago
    There is no package deal for websites. I know website owners really wish there was, but it's just that - wishful thinking. Maybe for sites which require registration (and hence explicitly accepting terms) that could be argued, but there's certainly no implicit agreement to download and process all the stuff the site is offering to the browser. And "entitled" is just a lazy insult.
- voltagex_ 11y ago
  Shit, do you block Mustache/Handlebars too because it's using your resources to render a template? That's quite a reductive argument - you get to the point where you don't turn the computer on because it's using your electricity.
  - blumkvist 11y ago
    Yes. please! voltagex_, do you and webmasters a favor and stop using a computer!
  - icebraining 11y ago
    You know, quite a lot of us do use NoScript, so that reduction to absurd is not really that effective. As for using electricity, that's why stan_rogers added the caveat of "do things the server ought to be doing at its own end".
frik 11y ago
Why are first-party analytics like pwiki blocked? They are the good guys... it's like reading the server log, except you get also the screen resolution and a few more infos. I don't mind if a website owner gets that stats for himself. What I (and a growing number of people) mind is that huge corporations collect that stats and then track me down and crunch the data to show me "personalised ads" (of products I already bought) and categorise as a person of interest group XY and then selling that data including my email address to evil spammer YZ.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  > except you get also the screen resolution and a few more infos. It is quite the sense of entitlement to think you have a right to that information. You have a right to log what people ask you (the server logs); logging anything more just makes you a creepy peeping-tom. > I don't mind That's nice. That doesn't mean everybody else agrees. You're right, in general - it is the aggregation at Google (et al) that is the real problem. My point is that it is highly presumptuous to assume everybody is ok with a particular type of logging.