4 ms·
"Let's pull a number out of the air -- 1000" That number seems extremely high; are you sure you didn't pull it out of something else? I'd think the order of 1
by edoloughlin 15y ago
"Let's pull a number out of the air -- 1000"
That number seems extremely high; are you sure you didn't pull it out of something else?
I'd think the order of 100 distinct sites per day is reasonable for someone who's also supposed to be working, which gives one true positive and one false positive, which isn't very much per day.
- zck 15y agoBut we're not talking about distinct sites -- if by "sites" you mean "domains", not "urls" -- we're talking about distinct webpages, or urls. Even with 100 distinct webpages per day, my point is still valid -- fully half of positives are false positives. One could just as easily argue that the number of one malicious site per day is large -- it certainly is in my experience. Also, Chrome isn't just for people at work; people use Chrome at home too. Especially early adopters, of which I imagine Chrome's audience is made up of in greater proportion than the population at large. Early adopters would view more pages than the average person anyway.