9 ms·
I had an article on the front page of Hacker News last year that had about 17,000 real visits, as determined by analysing my server log files. I was also using
by dddddaviddddd 6y ago
I had an article on the front page of Hacker News last year that had about 17,000 real visits, as determined by analysing my server log files. I was also using Google Analytics at the time, which told me I had 10,000 visitors (of which only 7 were using Firefox!).
Obviously there's a gap between what trackers say and reality, bigger for some demographics than for others.
- ta17711771 6y ago> of which only 7 were using Firefox Were reporting using Firefox. Also, not surprising, Firefox security leaves a lot to be desired.
- marcinzm 6y ago>Also, not surprising, Firefox security leaves a lot to be desired. Huh? Blocking google analytics tracking is a positive, not a negative regarding security.
- vlovich123 6y agoHe's talking about user agent spoofing.
- inetknght 6y agoI'm not so sure. It shouldn't matter whatsoever what user agent I'm using. In fact, not sending the user agent field would be massively better if only that in and of itself wasn't a unique datapoint.
- marcinzm 6y agoStill not sure how that ties into Firefox having worse security. User agent spoofing is a privacy item and a positive privacy item.
- vlovich123 6y agoIf Firefox users are disproportionately lying about the user agent for privacy then counts are off. This would impact 1p telemetry as well. If Firefox users are disproportionately running Adblock then they'll be undercounted (it's also entirely possible that Chrome & GA have some kind of thing where even if you're using Adblock they're able to correct the GA data they show you for Chrome users).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]