7 ms·

I understand your concern. It's also an analytics service. But I believe we are very different [1]. We deliberately collect very little data [2]. There is a bi

I understand your concern. It's also an analytics service. But I believe we are very different [1]. We deliberately collect very little data [2]. There is a big difference between "a person's surfing data" or "surfing data of all visitors combined". That's what we promise with Simple Analytics. [1] https://blog.simpleanalytics.com/why-simple-analytics-is-a-great-alternative-to-google-analytics#1-differences-in-core-values-privacy-first-vs-profit-first https://blog.simpleanalytics.com/why-simple-analytics-is-a-g... [2] https://docs.simpleanalytics.com/what-we-collect https://docs.simpleanalytics.com/what-we-collect

gspencley 5y ago
You're within your rights to create and offer whatever kind of service you want. As an end-user, however, any data what-so-ever sent to a 3rd party without my knowledge or consent is too much. There is no such thing as "the right amount." I'm OK with websites using self-hosted tools such as Matomo as long as the data never leaves their servers. Analytics is important to any business. But I choose to do business with said business, not with Shopify, not with Google, not with Facebook or Twitter (I'm looking at those "sign in with" widgets that run social media code in my browser) or whatever 3rd party "SaaS" service the website is outsourcing my data to for ease of development or convenience. I don't consent to my data being shared with people I don't know about and did not consent to give a single shred of my information to.
- chinathrow 5y ago
  > I'm OK with websites using self-hosted tools such as Matomo as long as the data never leaves their servers. You might never know that they backfeed data into external analytics services. Under this assumption, wouldn't you need to stop using _any_ website, at all?
- mwint 5y ago
  > any data what-so-ever sent to a 3rd party without my knowledge or consent is too much So do you want “we want to load JS from a CDN like literally everyone does, is that okay” popups on every website?
  - scoutt 5y ago
    As long as Personal Data isn't being trasferred, there is no need to ask.
    - mwint 5y ago
      That CDN will know your IP and what site you’re from, and likely can do a decent job correlating visits with other sites. The internet is just not designed for privacy at a technical level.
      - eps 5y ago
        > The internet is just not designed for privacy at a technical level. The Internet is A-Ok. The issue lies with various slimy companies that exploit web developers ignorance, laziness and negligence with free and easy shortcuts in exchange for the private data of said developers' clients. No one's forcing you to use CDNs in place of a properly setup caching. No one's stuffing Google Fonts down your designer's throat, they are just lazy to add local resources. An analytics service is not required and there are simple self-hosted options. And so on and so forth. And the most infuriating part is that these companies, Google being the offender, know perfectly well that they are exploiting the ignorance and they are willingly facilitating and encouraging the spread of practices that would've been viewed as wildly unethical not 10-15 years ago. Just look at the level of general erosion of privacy and nearly universal lack of concern for it in general population. If you reflect on it for a moment, it is plain fucking scary.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    > we want to load JS from a CDN like literally everyone does Well, carry on and load it, it's your server. Oh, wait, you mean you want ME to load it, into MY browser? That's a problem - my browser only loads JS from the origin server, and only if I give it explicit permission. As a developer, I deplore the use of CDNs to serve javascript libraries; you don't know what the CDN is going to serve to your users, it could change without warning and break your site.
    - 5y ago
- ComodoHacker 5y ago
  >as long as the data never leaves their servers This is kind of ridiculous in the cloud era, isn't it? The analogy with external accountant up this thread is a good one. It's not about where data are processed, it's about how it's used.
  - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
    No, it's not. Using Matomo on my own servers has nothing to do with the way GA etc. operates - it's an equivalent of going through my own Nginx logs and parsing them to generate diagrams and so on. Of course if I share personally identifiable data with a third party, it's a completely different thing - in this case it does not matter if it comes from Matomo or web server logs. But I agree with your conclusion: what matters is how it's being used. In this case - whether you share/sell it to others or not.* [*] But not only: it also matters if you take adequate care in protecting personally identifiable information or not.
    - germanier 5y ago
      In general, under the GDPR it doesn't matter much whether you process data yourself on your own server or contract that same task out to a third-party. Either that processing is legal or it isn't - ownership of the server doesn't play a role. The problem with Google Analytics here is not that it's a third-party but that it's under US control.
- rewq4321 5y ago
  This seems very impractical given the way the internet currently works. Most startups use dozens of SaaS products, let alone more basic/foundational things like global CDNs. You're being logged at every step of the process if only to prevent spam/DDoS/etc. What you're asking for would require a fundamental restructuring of the internet, and of software business models, and a lot of other stuff. I can't see that happening any time soon. In the meantime you can try using Tor, but good luck not getting blocked on half the websites you want to visit - and you can't blame the website for that (they need DDoS/spam defence).
  - acka 5y ago
    When I visit a website of some business, I provide them with an IP address for use during the session (because of the way TCP/IP works). I'm okay with said site using some kind of load-balancer, DDoS protection or what not, as long as the business takes full responsibility to keep my personal information private unless I specifically indicate otherwise (opt-in[1]), for example using a form on the landing page. I believe that this is the true intent of the GDPR in this matter. [1]: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-telecoms/data-protection-online-privacy/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-tel...
  - bcrosby95 5y ago
    Not only the internet, this is impractical given how any business works. Even a brick and mortar store is sharing aggregate customer buying habits with its supplier based upon products it buys from them.
- Kerrick 5y ago
  > I'm looking at those "sign in with" widgets that run social media code in my browser Arguably, they provide code that can be run in your browser, but your browser chooses to run it. And since your browser is a user agent, you choose to run the code by way of installing and configuring a browser that makes that choice by default.
eps 5y ago
Here you go again, being coy. It's not an "also" analytics service. It _is_ an analytics service. If a website poped a question saying "Do you consent to your visit data being passed to Simple Analytics for processing?", how many people would say Yes? Close to zero. Just look at the stats on 3rd party cookie refusals - when done easily, the refusal rates are in high 90%. People may be lazy, but they sure as heck know they don't want to be tracked IF it's actually mentioned. So what you offer is a GA alternative that makes website operators feel better about themselves for not using the GA. The situation with the visitors remains exactly the same - the still getting shafted with something that none of them wants. The only way to do analytics in a way that's respectful to the visitors' privacy is with an installable on-host software. That's it.
- b4st1en 5y ago
  > The only way to do analytics in a way that's respectful to the visitors' privacy is with an installable on-host software. That's it. How is that more respectful? I can fingerprint you pretty much the same with server logs (IP, user-agent, ...), don't I? I can even use cookies without any JS.
- 1123581321 5y ago
  Did you read their docs? They aren’t setting cookies or collecting IP addresses. There’s no question to me that EU authorities would approve this method.
  - nybble41 5y ago
    Visitors' IP addresses are provided to Simple Analytics in the course of loading their script and reporting back the results. That's all it took to get web sites using public Google Fonts resources in trouble—note that this didn't involve any actual analytics scripts or overt data collection, just some embedded CSS and font resources. The only real advantage Simple Analytics has here is that they aren't Google, so they aren't as much of a political target and don't have deep pockets to attract legal predators on the lookout for an oversize payout—which is a pretty thin justification for treating them any differently.

gspencley 5y ago

You're within your rights to create and offer whatever kind of service you want. As an end-user, however, any data what-so-ever sent to a 3rd party without my knowledge or consent is too much. There is no such thing as "the right amount." I'm OK with websites using self-hosted tools such as Matomo as long as the data never leaves their servers. Analytics is important to any business. But I choose to do business with said business, not with Shopify, not with Google, not with Facebook or Twitter (I'm looking at those "sign in with" widgets that run social media code in my browser) or whatever 3rd party "SaaS" service the website is outsourcing my data to for ease of development or convenience. I don't consent to my data being shared with people I don't know about and did not consent to give a single shred of my information to.

chinathrow 5y ago
> I'm OK with websites using self-hosted tools such as Matomo as long as the data never leaves their servers. You might never know that they backfeed data into external analytics services. Under this assumption, wouldn't you need to stop using _any_ website, at all?
mwint 5y ago
> any data what-so-ever sent to a 3rd party without my knowledge or consent is too much So do you want “we want to load JS from a CDN like literally everyone does, is that okay” popups on every website?
- scoutt 5y ago
  As long as Personal Data isn't being trasferred, there is no need to ask.
  - mwint 5y ago
    That CDN will know your IP and what site you’re from, and likely can do a decent job correlating visits with other sites. The internet is just not designed for privacy at a technical level.
    - eps 5y ago
      > The internet is just not designed for privacy at a technical level. The Internet is A-Ok. The issue lies with various slimy companies that exploit web developers ignorance, laziness and negligence with free and easy shortcuts in exchange for the private data of said developers' clients. No one's forcing you to use CDNs in place of a properly setup caching. No one's stuffing Google Fonts down your designer's throat, they are just lazy to add local resources. An analytics service is not required and there are simple self-hosted options. And so on and so forth. And the most infuriating part is that these companies, Google being the offender, know perfectly well that they are exploiting the ignorance and they are willingly facilitating and encouraging the spread of practices that would've been viewed as wildly unethical not 10-15 years ago. Just look at the level of general erosion of privacy and nearly universal lack of concern for it in general population. If you reflect on it for a moment, it is plain fucking scary.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  > we want to load JS from a CDN like literally everyone does Well, carry on and load it, it's your server. Oh, wait, you mean you want ME to load it, into MY browser? That's a problem - my browser only loads JS from the origin server, and only if I give it explicit permission. As a developer, I deplore the use of CDNs to serve javascript libraries; you don't know what the CDN is going to serve to your users, it could change without warning and break your site.
  - 5y ago
ComodoHacker 5y ago
>as long as the data never leaves their servers This is kind of ridiculous in the cloud era, isn't it? The analogy with external accountant up this thread is a good one. It's not about where data are processed, it's about how it's used.
- hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
  No, it's not. Using Matomo on my own servers has nothing to do with the way GA etc. operates - it's an equivalent of going through my own Nginx logs and parsing them to generate diagrams and so on. Of course if I share personally identifiable data with a third party, it's a completely different thing - in this case it does not matter if it comes from Matomo or web server logs. But I agree with your conclusion: what matters is how it's being used. In this case - whether you share/sell it to others or not.* [*] But not only: it also matters if you take adequate care in protecting personally identifiable information or not.
  - germanier 5y ago
    In general, under the GDPR it doesn't matter much whether you process data yourself on your own server or contract that same task out to a third-party. Either that processing is legal or it isn't - ownership of the server doesn't play a role. The problem with Google Analytics here is not that it's a third-party but that it's under US control.
rewq4321 5y ago
This seems very impractical given the way the internet currently works. Most startups use dozens of SaaS products, let alone more basic/foundational things like global CDNs. You're being logged at every step of the process if only to prevent spam/DDoS/etc. What you're asking for would require a fundamental restructuring of the internet, and of software business models, and a lot of other stuff. I can't see that happening any time soon. In the meantime you can try using Tor, but good luck not getting blocked on half the websites you want to visit - and you can't blame the website for that (they need DDoS/spam defence).
- acka 5y ago
  When I visit a website of some business, I provide them with an IP address for use during the session (because of the way TCP/IP works). I'm okay with said site using some kind of load-balancer, DDoS protection or what not, as long as the business takes full responsibility to keep my personal information private unless I specifically indicate otherwise (opt-in[1]), for example using a form on the landing page. I believe that this is the true intent of the GDPR in this matter. [1]: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-telecoms/data-protection-online-privacy/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-tel...
- bcrosby95 5y ago
  Not only the internet, this is impractical given how any business works. Even a brick and mortar store is sharing aggregate customer buying habits with its supplier based upon products it buys from them.
Kerrick 5y ago
> I'm looking at those "sign in with" widgets that run social media code in my browser Arguably, they provide code that can be run in your browser, but your browser chooses to run it. And since your browser is a user agent, you choose to run the code by way of installing and configuring a browser that makes that choice by default.

eps 5y ago

Here you go again, being coy. It's not an "also" analytics service. It _is_ an analytics service. If a website poped a question saying "Do you consent to your visit data being passed to Simple Analytics for processing?", how many people would say Yes? Close to zero. Just look at the stats on 3rd party cookie refusals - when done easily, the refusal rates are in high 90%. People may be lazy, but they sure as heck know they don't want to be tracked IF it's actually mentioned. So what you offer is a GA alternative that makes website operators feel better about themselves for not using the GA. The situation with the visitors remains exactly the same - the still getting shafted with something that none of them wants. The only way to do analytics in a way that's respectful to the visitors' privacy is with an installable on-host software. That's it.

b4st1en 5y ago
> The only way to do analytics in a way that's respectful to the visitors' privacy is with an installable on-host software. That's it. How is that more respectful? I can fingerprint you pretty much the same with server logs (IP, user-agent, ...), don't I? I can even use cookies without any JS.
1123581321 5y ago
Did you read their docs? They aren’t setting cookies or collecting IP addresses. There’s no question to me that EU authorities would approve this method.
- nybble41 5y ago
  Visitors' IP addresses are provided to Simple Analytics in the course of loading their script and reporting back the results. That's all it took to get web sites using public Google Fonts resources in trouble—note that this didn't involve any actual analytics scripts or overt data collection, just some embedded CSS and font resources. The only real advantage Simple Analytics has here is that they aren't Google, so they aren't as much of a political target and don't have deep pockets to attract legal predators on the lookout for an oversize payout—which is a pretty thin justification for treating them any differently.