5 ms·
I've downvoted you because, as others have pointed out, your statement that Google doesn't fingerprint is factually incorrect.
by driverdan 7y ago
I've downvoted you because, as others have pointed out, your statement that Google doesn't fingerprint is factually incorrect.
- Ajedi32 7y agoI disagree. No one has posted any evidence that Google engages in fingerprinting users beyond simple user-controllable mechanisms like cookies. (Though several have indeed made that assertion with no evidence.)
- driverdan 7y agoReCaptcha and Analytics both fingerprint.
- lmkg 7y agoGoogle Analytics does not fingerprint. Hits are identified with a user either by a first-party cookie (called the Client ID), or with a user-id value provided by the site owner. The site owner could provide their own fingerprinting value as a user-id, but the fingerprinting is not done by analytics itself. (There are some cases where identifiers are pulled in from other systems, but none of them can be used as the basis for unifying users.)
- driverdan 7y agoGA records a lot of data about the user such as screen resolution and browser version. It doesn't do full fingerprinting to identify unique users but it uses many common fingerprinting techniques.
- Spivak 7y agoLike collecting any data at all? I mean “what browsers and what versions do I need to support” and “what resolutions do I need to design for” are pretty benign questions.
- Ajedi32 7y agoRe-Captcha doesn't fingerprint users. It uses statistical models to guess whether a particular user is a bot or not; it doesn't de-anonymize users or identify them in any way. Analytics doesn't either, it uses regular cookies. (See sibling comments.)
- cpeterso 7y agoStatistical models based on what? Browser characteristics that could also be used for fingerprinting?
- Ajedi32 7y agoCookies, browser characteristics, user behavior, etc. Just because a certain bit of information could theoretically be used for fingerprinting users, doesn't mean any system that uses that information is doing fingerprinting.
- robdachshund 7y agoAgreed, but it's incredibly naive to assume they are not. Google's product is it's users, and it's a known fact they manipulate results based on what they want you to think or what they think you want to see. They are completely shady on privacy. I don't know why HN seems to be so stubborn about things like this. It's clear as day they fingerprint users, but seems like the majority of users here refuse to believe a corporation or government has done anything wrong unless they literally admit it in a press release.
- cameronbrown 7y agoIP address, the client/user ID, type of interaction, timestamp and a few other bits of data like your device hardware. GA isn't nearly as invasive as people think. The real problem is data being combined on the backed and correlated across websites by ad networks, not the analytics itself. Edit: Worth a look if you're interested in what's being collected: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/protocol/v1/parameters#aip https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection...
- ocdtrekkie 7y agoHN guidelines would prefer that you don't comment on downvoting, as it makes for boring reading. If you don't have anything substantive to add (such as, if "others have pointed out" your thoughts already), just vote and move on. :) https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- yjftsjthsd-h 7y agoAlthough the words "I'm downvoting you" aren't useful, I would argue that saying why you're downvoting someone is really important. Helps prevent the feeling of shooting the messenger.
- drankula3 7y agoIn that case, "I'm downvoting you because you're wrong" could be condensed to "you're wrong."