5 ms·

I've read your other replies to this thread and your argument does not seem to be made in good faith. This whole thread is about surveillance based advertising

I've read your other replies to this thread and your argument does not seem to be made in good faith. This whole thread is about surveillance based advertising being bad. In no way is using an IP address in a firewall a form of surveillance. It isn't. The IP address isn't being associated with any other data, it's just some numbers floating in space, disconnected from any human being. There is no association with that IP address of what you like and don't like, what you have purchased, what links you have clicked, or anything else. It's just in a firewall, and that firewall rule could be blocking an entire CIDR block, especially in the case of IPv6. But even if it were surveillance, that's irrelevant to this discussion about the ethics of surveillance-based advertising. I'm not going to waste my time further on this thread after making this one last point. > This just slows down bot spam instead of testing if someone is a bot. Someone posting spam to your site once a minute is still annoying. Google CAPTCHA is trivially bypassed all the time. Do you really think it isn't? Sometimes using services like Amazon Mechanical Turk, sometimes using simple computer vision. It doesn't test whether someone/something is a bot either... it just tests whether they can pass the CAPTCHA. It certainly doesn't test whether they're part of a DDoS, nor does it test their intentions to find whether they are good or malicious. It's just a CAPTCHA, but it also uses a lot of surveillance... and as I said, I have mixed feelings about that. I didn't mean for this to become the point of the thread, it is definitely off topic. The idea of Proof of Work CAPTCHAs is that you can actually make it more expensive for an attacker to solve those than it would be for the attacker to solve Google CAPTCHAs. Obviously, this is still an area of debate and research.

charcircuit 5y ago
>your argument does not seem to be made in good faith I'm not exactly sure what this means. I used to be all for total privacy, but I found that future to not be sustainable. Perhaps I'm just jaded, but privacy just gets in the way. >This whole thread is about surveillance based advertising being bad. Well this part of the thread isn't. It's talking about how surveillance improves services by allowing them to deal with abuse. >In no way is using an IP address in a firewall a form of surveillance. It isn't. The IP address isn't being associated with any other data, it's just some numbers floating in space, disconnected from any human being. Wrong. I am using your IP as part of a scheme to fingerprint you. I want my rate limit to limit each person separately. An IP address is just a somewhat decent way to approximate that. >The idea of Proof of Work CAPTCHAs is that you can actually make it more expensive for an attacker to solve those than it would be for the attacker to solve Google CAPTCHAs. This has to be carefully balanced with the user experience. No user in going to want to wait 5 minutes to post when they can just have a Google account with a good reputation and just click a checkbox.
- danbruc 5y ago
  I used to be all for total privacy, but I found that future to not be sustainable. Perhaps I'm just jaded, but privacy just gets in the way. That's not your decision, I decide what matters to me, whether I want my privacy or this nebulous sustainability, whatever this is suppose to be. Wrong. I am using your IP as part of a scheme to fingerprint you. I want my rate limit to limit each person separately. An IP address is just a somewhat decent way to approximate that. Then let me turn this around, if using my IP address in this scenario is surveillance, then don't do it. If it is necessary, then ask me for permission, can we use your IP address to fight off attacks and ensure the availability of our website or do you prefer that the website might not always be available due to attacks? And the same applies if you want to rate limit all users, offer the choice between not using your website or opting in for IP based rate limiting. It's that easy.

charcircuit 5y ago

>your argument does not seem to be made in good faith I'm not exactly sure what this means. I used to be all for total privacy, but I found that future to not be sustainable. Perhaps I'm just jaded, but privacy just gets in the way. >This whole thread is about surveillance based advertising being bad. Well this part of the thread isn't. It's talking about how surveillance improves services by allowing them to deal with abuse. >In no way is using an IP address in a firewall a form of surveillance. It isn't. The IP address isn't being associated with any other data, it's just some numbers floating in space, disconnected from any human being. Wrong. I am using your IP as part of a scheme to fingerprint you. I want my rate limit to limit each person separately. An IP address is just a somewhat decent way to approximate that. >The idea of Proof of Work CAPTCHAs is that you can actually make it more expensive for an attacker to solve those than it would be for the attacker to solve Google CAPTCHAs. This has to be carefully balanced with the user experience. No user in going to want to wait 5 minutes to post when they can just have a Google account with a good reputation and just click a checkbox.

danbruc 5y ago
I used to be all for total privacy, but I found that future to not be sustainable. Perhaps I'm just jaded, but privacy just gets in the way. That's not your decision, I decide what matters to me, whether I want my privacy or this nebulous sustainability, whatever this is suppose to be. Wrong. I am using your IP as part of a scheme to fingerprint you. I want my rate limit to limit each person separately. An IP address is just a somewhat decent way to approximate that. Then let me turn this around, if using my IP address in this scenario is surveillance, then don't do it. If it is necessary, then ask me for permission, can we use your IP address to fight off attacks and ensure the availability of our website or do you prefer that the website might not always be available due to attacks? And the same applies if you want to rate limit all users, offer the choice between not using your website or opting in for IP based rate limiting. It's that easy.