5 ms·
Nope, but this article isn't aimed at HN readers. It's aimed at lay people who don't necessarily understand what actions they're taking to implicitly undermine
by xxxtentachyon 7y ago
Nope, but this article isn't aimed at HN readers. It's aimed at lay people who don't necessarily understand what actions they're taking to implicitly undermine their own privacy or jeopardize the future of an open, standards-driven web. Katherine has written other, more innovative pieces around the same issues: https://www.fastcompany.com/90369697/googles-new-recaptcha-has-a-dark-side https://www.fastcompany.com/90369697/googles-new-recaptcha-h...
- cookie_monsta 7y ago> Nope, but this article isn't aimed at HN readers. It's aimed at lay people who don't necessarily understand what actions they're taking... So why is it here?
- naniwaduni 7y agoAn article can be of interest to HN readers without being aimed at them.
- cookie_monsta 7y agoNo doubt. But the reason why this one isn't aimed at HN readers is because they've heard all of this multiple times already. I'm not disagreeing with the article, I'm just wondering why it is of interest.