5 ms·

Although I'm very anti-tracking, I don't think the don-not-track policy should be the default. This is not going to work this way. The whole DNT thing has actua

Although I'm very anti-tracking, I don't think the don-not-track policy should be the default. This is not going to work this way. The whole DNT thing has actually been killed by Microsoft setting it on by default. Let the people who don't care to go and toggle the checkbox in the browser settings be tracked. It also should be possible to set the DNT field on per-domain basis.

Pesthuf 6y ago
It absolutely shouldn't. Advertisers STILL cite that Microsoft incident as the reason they don't support DNT, even though this happened 8 years ago. Just goes to show how dishonest they are. Ironically they don't ignore DNT - they use it as part of their fingerprinting... I think if DNT was per Domain, advertisers would let your browser make a bunch of requests to different domains and check for which you have DNT set, which should give a fairly unique fingerprint...
corty 6y ago
DNT wasn't killed by Microsoft. DNT was killed by advertisers looking for any reason to kill DNT. They just found Microsoft's default as their excuse to ignore DNT.
dmitriid 6y ago
Nothing to do with MS. Moreover, Safari is removing DNT because DNT is now used as an extra parameter in browser fingerprinting ... to better track users.
freeone3000 6y ago
That seems very sour grapes - a major vendor said that it's gonna ship a browser with a setting configured, and everyone chooses to ignore that setting because it's common? That's pathologic thinking.
Nursie 6y ago
Do Not Track was always a joke. As if asking nicely ever worked with the ad industry. The point of the law changes is that it becomes the website's responsibility to act properly, and ensure real opt-in. If DNT was default off and was respected, most people would have never heard of it to switch it on. That's the only reason the ad industry even comment on it - it was designed to do nothing.
- qwerty456127 6y ago
  > The point of the law changes is that it becomes the website's responsibility to act properly, and ensure real opt-in. Yet they still don't. They just manipulate the user into clicking yes without reading, again. I couldn't even find how to deny "the Oath" no matter how hard I tried.
  - Nursie 6y ago
    The Oath pages are the worst. Blatant violation. Hopefully sometime it will be prosecuted. Until then treat as a big red flag.

Pesthuf 6y ago

It absolutely shouldn't. Advertisers STILL cite that Microsoft incident as the reason they don't support DNT, even though this happened 8 years ago. Just goes to show how dishonest they are. Ironically they don't ignore DNT - they use it as part of their fingerprinting... I think if DNT was per Domain, advertisers would let your browser make a bunch of requests to different domains and check for which you have DNT set, which should give a fairly unique fingerprint...

corty 6y ago

DNT wasn't killed by Microsoft. DNT was killed by advertisers looking for any reason to kill DNT. They just found Microsoft's default as their excuse to ignore DNT.

dmitriid 6y ago

Nothing to do with MS. Moreover, Safari is removing DNT because DNT is now used as an extra parameter in browser fingerprinting ... to better track users.

freeone3000 6y ago

That seems very sour grapes - a major vendor said that it's gonna ship a browser with a setting configured, and everyone chooses to ignore that setting because it's common? That's pathologic thinking.

Nursie 6y ago

Do Not Track was always a joke. As if asking nicely ever worked with the ad industry. The point of the law changes is that it becomes the website's responsibility to act properly, and ensure real opt-in. If DNT was default off and was respected, most people would have never heard of it to switch it on. That's the only reason the ad industry even comment on it - it was designed to do nothing.

qwerty456127 6y ago
> The point of the law changes is that it becomes the website's responsibility to act properly, and ensure real opt-in. Yet they still don't. They just manipulate the user into clicking yes without reading, again. I couldn't even find how to deny "the Oath" no matter how hard I tried.
- Nursie 6y ago
  The Oath pages are the worst. Blatant violation. Hopefully sometime it will be prosecuted. Until then treat as a big red flag.