3 ms·

Thank you for the detailed reply! I understand that the technical details might not be of great interest for who you were primarily targeting with the blog post

Thank you for the detailed reply! I understand that the technical details might not be of great interest for who you were primarily targeting with the blog post, but I think the discussion on HN would be much enriched (possibly including actionable-for-you ideas and suggestions) if these points were mentioned in the submission itself. > I have no such personal or professional belief, and I can assure it isn't a view held by our company/team Fair enough, it might just be my interpretation that is colored by the context of the content being written by an analytics business. Although I'm still at a bit of a loss what the implication is in the sentence I was referencing. Could you spell that out for me?

pixelmonkey 6y ago
Yea, I think the point of the post was to "name a thing", not necessarily to wade into the tech. (Like I mentioned, was written by a PM colleague who has been discussing this issue with customers/prospects.) That is, aim was to introduce this idea of "shadow traffic", since most of our customers/prospects don't even know it exists! (Whereas, for example, "bot traffic", which can inflate analytics numbers, is a well-known problem.) The sentence you are referencing is about Sentry error tracking, right? All I was intending to say is that sometimes, tracking protection throws the baby out with the bathwater. The end user wants to avoid creepy ads and privacy leaks. But, instead, they are blocking error tracking tools, whose primary purpose is to catch and fix frontend coding bugs. And then when those same blocking rules become browser defaults, it can end up in a situation where whole classes of users don't have errors tracked/logged, merely because the site owner (quite reasonably) chose to use a SaaS for error tracking/logging, rather than, say, rolling one's own self-hosted system for that commodity use case.

pixelmonkey 6y ago

Yea, I think the point of the post was to "name a thing", not necessarily to wade into the tech. (Like I mentioned, was written by a PM colleague who has been discussing this issue with customers/prospects.) That is, aim was to introduce this idea of "shadow traffic", since most of our customers/prospects don't even know it exists! (Whereas, for example, "bot traffic", which can inflate analytics numbers, is a well-known problem.) The sentence you are referencing is about Sentry error tracking, right? All I was intending to say is that sometimes, tracking protection throws the baby out with the bathwater. The end user wants to avoid creepy ads and privacy leaks. But, instead, they are blocking error tracking tools, whose primary purpose is to catch and fix frontend coding bugs. And then when those same blocking rules become browser defaults, it can end up in a situation where whole classes of users don't have errors tracked/logged, merely because the site owner (quite reasonably) chose to use a SaaS for error tracking/logging, rather than, say, rolling one's own self-hosted system for that commodity use case.