4 ms·

Presumably things that promote a healthy internet also benefit website owners since their sites exist on the internet.

by dcow 6y ago

encryptluks2 6y ago
Does Firefox sending URLs you visit to a an external service not constitute as unhealthy?
- dcow 6y ago
  You can opt out of that (or is it opt in now), too.
  - encryptluks2 6y ago
    You can opt out with Chromium too
- _underfl0w_ 6y ago
  "What about $otherthing?" Neither is good, but that doesn't necessarily make the topic you're attempting to pivot to relevant in this situation. Also, Cloudflare (provider of the external service you mention, assuming you're talking about DNS-over-HTTPS) definitely isn't Google. At least not yet.
  - encryptluks2 6y ago
    No, I'm talking about their browser protection feature that is supposed to check for malware and unsafe domains.
    - dcow 6y ago
      Doesn't that use a bloom filter? So in reality it’s very few if any of the urls you visit are actually sent anywhere.
ehsankia 6y ago
That sounds like people arguing that nuclear energy is a bad solution to climate change because it's not perfect and technically not renewable. - FLoC is still far better than third party cookies - As much as we'd love to live in a world without advertising, 95% of the internet wouldn't exist without it. - If we are going to have advertising, I'd much rather have FLoC than third party cookies
- radiator 6y ago
  But even if it were so, what would be the problem if 95% of the internet wouldn't exist?
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > FLoC is still far better than third party cookies I don't care because my browser blocks third party cookies.
- mippenhappen 6y ago
  >95% of the internet wouldn't exist without it. And that would properly be a good thing.
- syntactic-sugar 6y ago
  - FLoC is still far better than third party cookies I'd take issue with 'far' better, and it has the additional problem of turning the privacy issue in to a moving target. How long did it take to get the wider public and legislators moving on tracking cookies? Now it's a similar issue, just it's called FLoC and its code on your own machine doing the spying. - A world without advertising Super disagree that this at all an issue. Most of the revenue that gets eliminated is for stuff that people wont pay for anyway, and I question its value if that's the case. Personally I think all advertising is an utter blight, and couldn't care less if it goes away forever and takes its revenue with it. It will be a struggle for a while, and many small sites will fall. The stuff that will be left is stuff that's hopefully worth the money people pay for it, or run as a passion project.
  - dcow 6y ago

Presumably things that promote a healthy internet also benefit website owners since their sites exist on the internet.

by dcow 6y ago

Presumably things that promote a healthy internet also benefit website owners since their sites exist on the internet.

encryptluks2 6y ago

Does Firefox sending URLs you visit to a an external service not constitute as unhealthy?

dcow 6y ago
You can opt out of that (or is it opt in now), too.
- encryptluks2 6y ago
  You can opt out with Chromium too
_underfl0w_ 6y ago
"What about $otherthing?" Neither is good, but that doesn't necessarily make the topic you're attempting to pivot to relevant in this situation. Also, Cloudflare (provider of the external service you mention, assuming you're talking about DNS-over-HTTPS) definitely isn't Google. At least not yet.
- encryptluks2 6y ago
  No, I'm talking about their browser protection feature that is supposed to check for malware and unsafe domains.
  - dcow 6y ago
    Doesn't that use a bloom filter? So in reality it’s very few if any of the urls you visit are actually sent anywhere.

ehsankia 6y ago

That sounds like people arguing that nuclear energy is a bad solution to climate change because it's not perfect and technically not renewable. - FLoC is still far better than third party cookies - As much as we'd love to live in a world without advertising, 95% of the internet wouldn't exist without it. - If we are going to have advertising, I'd much rather have FLoC than third party cookies

radiator 6y ago
But even if it were so, what would be the problem if 95% of the internet wouldn't exist?
heavyset_go 6y ago
> FLoC is still far better than third party cookies I don't care because my browser blocks third party cookies.
mippenhappen 6y ago
>95% of the internet wouldn't exist without it. And that would properly be a good thing.
syntactic-sugar 6y ago
- FLoC is still far better than third party cookies I'd take issue with 'far' better, and it has the additional problem of turning the privacy issue in to a moving target. How long did it take to get the wider public and legislators moving on tracking cookies? Now it's a similar issue, just it's called FLoC and its code on your own machine doing the spying. - A world without advertising Super disagree that this at all an issue. Most of the revenue that gets eliminated is for stuff that people wont pay for anyway, and I question its value if that's the case. Personally I think all advertising is an utter blight, and couldn't care less if it goes away forever and takes its revenue with it. It will be a struggle for a while, and many small sites will fall. The stuff that will be left is stuff that's hopefully worth the money people pay for it, or run as a passion project.
- dcow 6y ago