3 ms·

Necessary for whom? Privacy purists seem to be surprised that website and app owners want/need analytics to meaningfully improve their app's usability. I praise

Necessary for whom? Privacy purists seem to be surprised that website and app owners want/need analytics to meaningfully improve their app's usability. I praise SA's privacy oriented approach as a meaningful alternative to GA. This sort of overly-critical hyperbole doesn't help the privacy conversation. If follow SA loses a feature it likely needs to remain competitive, and customers would have another reason to go back to Google Analytics. Hardly a necessary privacy win a my book.

pdkl95 7y ago
> Necessary for whom? Necessary for anyone interested in preserving democracy[1]. Unless we actively fight to preserve privacy, surveillance capitalism will continue to "disrupt" traditional forms of power. > If follow SA loses a feature it likely needs to remain competitive, and customers would have another reason to go back to Google Analytics. Continuing the betrayal of user privacy in the hope of appeasing the surveillance capitalists won't be "[privacy] for our time". Advertisers and other eavesdroppers have consistently demonstrated they will maximally exploit any tool available to them. [1] http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/shoshana-zuboff-q-and-a-the-age-of-surveillance-capital.html http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/shoshana-zuboff-q-and...
TeMPOraL 7y ago
> Privacy purists seem to be surprised that website and app owners want/need analytics to meaningfully improve their app's usability. Both "privacy purists" and many other people see this as expediency at best, and a lie at worst (i.e. once marketing gets wind of the tracking built for development purposes; see e.g. recent Gitlab fiasco).