4 ms·

I could live with that and I think many users would agree.

by tomthe 5y ago

noduerme 5y ago
Live with a 2 font maximum and popups every time a site chose to load another font? It would break every icon on the web. You'd either only load the icons or only load the text fonts. If you want to avoid fingerprinting, and actually think this method remotely works, by all means block those requests. If you actually care about privacy a better place to start would be the fact that chrome logs you in on the browser level whenever you login to anything with a Google password. Some random fingerprinting is not worth shutting down all design for. On that idea we should just go back to dialup because everything is too dangerous for idiots to handle.
- onion2k 5y ago
  If you actually care about privacy a better place to start would be the fact that chrome logs you in on the browser level whenever you login to anything with a Google password. Google is not the only company that has no respect for privacy. Privacy protection needs to go further, and stop privacy invasion completely. There is a reasonable balance to strike between privacy, design and usability though. That's why I said 2 or 3 fonts. Maybe 4 at a push. If a site is using more than that then either the developers aren't very good, or the designers aren't very good, or it's trying to attack the user's privacy. Whichever one it is, it should be stopped.
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  I hate fancy designed sites that take forever to load, or need to be refreshed to work. If you’re really calling everyone an idiot who doesn’t like your bloated site design, re-examine why is it genius to have bloated sites like yours?
playpause 5y ago
They might agree in principle, but they’d be pretty pissed off when nothing works when the open their web browser. The golden rule in web standards development is “don’t break the web”, ie you can’t just recklessly change web platform features, you have to do it thoughtfully and carefully to avoid breaking existing websites. It’s not a perfect rule, there are exceptions where the breakage is tiny and the benefit is huge, but what you’re proposing is huge destruction and would not make it past the first stage of consideration.

I could live with that and I think many users would agree.

by tomthe 5y ago

I could live with that and I think many users would agree.

Live with a 2 font maximum and popups every time a site chose to load another font? It would break every icon on the web. You'd either only load the icons or only load the text fonts. If you want to avoid fingerprinting, and actually think this method remotely works, by all means block those requests. If you actually care about privacy a better place to start would be the fact that chrome logs you in on the browser level whenever you login to anything with a Google password. Some random fingerprinting is not worth shutting down all design for. On that idea we should just go back to dialup because everything is too dangerous for idiots to handle.

onion2k 5y ago
If you actually care about privacy a better place to start would be the fact that chrome logs you in on the browser level whenever you login to anything with a Google password. Google is not the only company that has no respect for privacy. Privacy protection needs to go further, and stop privacy invasion completely. There is a reasonable balance to strike between privacy, design and usability though. That's why I said 2 or 3 fonts. Maybe 4 at a push. If a site is using more than that then either the developers aren't very good, or the designers aren't very good, or it's trying to attack the user's privacy. Whichever one it is, it should be stopped.
GhettoComputers 5y ago
I hate fancy designed sites that take forever to load, or need to be refreshed to work. If you’re really calling everyone an idiot who doesn’t like your bloated site design, re-examine why is it genius to have bloated sites like yours?

playpause 5y ago

They might agree in principle, but they’d be pretty pissed off when nothing works when the open their web browser. The golden rule in web standards development is “don’t break the web”, ie you can’t just recklessly change web platform features, you have to do it thoughtfully and carefully to avoid breaking existing websites. It’s not a perfect rule, there are exceptions where the breakage is tiny and the benefit is huge, but what you’re proposing is huge destruction and would not make it past the first stage of consideration.