6 ms·

Tracking server-side is fine, it is assumed the server logs contain a record of my visits and I have no problem with that. I think what most people object to is

Tracking server-side is fine, it is assumed the server logs contain a record of my visits and I have no problem with that. I think what most people object to is the third-party tracking that so many people use. Company A tracking my visits to Company A's website = OK Company A using Google Analytics to track my visits (while also enabling Google to track me across multiple sites) = Not OK EDIT: (replying here as we've reached max comment depth) - I was unaware that it is possible to use Google Analytics server-side only (is this true?) but I hope my original point is still clear, DIY tracking is fine.

JupiterMoon 11y ago
I agree with your position. However... You misunderstand. There have been several commentators here on HN saying that they are moving Google Analytics server side. They seem to think that people are only objecting to the cookie or the presence of the JS rather than objecting to the pervasive cross-site tracking.
- vive-la-liberte 11y ago
  In that case, f that and f them. Do not track me.
  - mhoad 11y ago
    Are you are aware that Google provide you with a method to do this regardless that doesn't rely on random script blocking? Details here https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout
    - malka 11y ago
      Why would I trust google with this ? I'd rather do it myself.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
manigandham 11y ago
Yes. GA has server-side API's available to premium accounts. You can also just host the ga.js file yourself. Or run a reverse proxy or any of a dozen other methods to collect data and pass it to GA. Using the standard 3rd party tag is just for convenience.
- malka 11y ago
  how can GA correlate between site then ? The server-side does not have access to my GA cookie. Browser fingerprinting ?
  - manigandham 11y ago
    Yes, cookies are outdated and just a fallback. Also, unless you never go to a google-owned domain name, you'll be cookied regardless.
- lstamour 11y ago
  FYI, server-side APIs don't require premium accounts. :) I'm pretty sure it's the same mechanism used for mobile/app non-browser tracking.
JupiterMoon 11y ago
Just a little HN tip. If you click the time of the comment you can reply to it even if there is no direct reply link.

JupiterMoon 11y ago

I agree with your position. However... You misunderstand. There have been several commentators here on HN saying that they are moving Google Analytics server side. They seem to think that people are only objecting to the cookie or the presence of the JS rather than objecting to the pervasive cross-site tracking.

vive-la-liberte 11y ago
In that case, f that and f them. Do not track me.
- mhoad 11y ago
  Are you are aware that Google provide you with a method to do this regardless that doesn't rely on random script blocking? Details here https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout
  - malka 11y ago
    Why would I trust google with this ? I'd rather do it myself.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

manigandham 11y ago

Yes. GA has server-side API's available to premium accounts. You can also just host the ga.js file yourself. Or run a reverse proxy or any of a dozen other methods to collect data and pass it to GA. Using the standard 3rd party tag is just for convenience.

malka 11y ago
how can GA correlate between site then ? The server-side does not have access to my GA cookie. Browser fingerprinting ?
- manigandham 11y ago
  Yes, cookies are outdated and just a fallback. Also, unless you never go to a google-owned domain name, you'll be cookied regardless.
lstamour 11y ago
FYI, server-side APIs don't require premium accounts. :) I'm pretty sure it's the same mechanism used for mobile/app non-browser tracking.

JupiterMoon 11y ago

Just a little HN tip. If you click the time of the comment you can reply to it even if there is no direct reply link.