3 ms·

The original article: > Each dot represents one tracking resource (like a script, tracking pixel or image), which would be blocked by an ad-blocker [emphasis

The original article: > Each dot represents one tracking resource (like a script, tracking pixel or image), which would be blocked by an ad-blocker [emphasis added] Immediately after excerpting that, the critique: > This strikes me as an overly broad definition of tracking; as best I can tell, Manjoo and his team counted every single script, image, or cookie that was loaded from a 3rd-party domain, no matter its function. Ad blockers typically don't just indiscriminately block all third-party resources. I suspect that the author simply isn't aware of which things are and aren't tracking users, and assumes that they don't track users unless that's their explicit purpose.

bscphil 7y ago
> Ad blockers typically don't just indiscriminately block all third-party resources. I suspect that the author simply isn't aware of which things are and aren't tracking users, and assumes that they don't track users unless that's their explicit purpose. Yep, and they seem to misunderstand the Webkit page too. As I read it, they're not even planning to block ad and tracking scripts at all. What they are blocking is: 1. Cross-site tracking (e.g. using a stored UUID or tracking cookie) 2. "Covert" means of tracking that fingerprint users (and therefore enable cross site tracking that can't be otherwise blocked by the browser). I don't see any evidence that the Webkit devs consider third party requests to be cross-site tracking per se. You and I (rightfully) worry about tracking sites correlating users via IP addresses and other means, but what Webkit seems to be planning is simply isolating individual sites, kind of like Firefox's containers. It's not much. Maybe there's hope they'll clean referers too?