5 ms·

Statcounter is in the list[0] firefox uses to block trackers, it also seems like Edge use the same list [1], so the 3% is more FF-users who are not using the bu

Statcounter is in the list[0] firefox uses to block trackers, it also seems like Edge use the same list [1], so the 3% is more FF-users who are not using the build in tracking protection [0]https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protection/blob/master/services.json https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti... [1]https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection#trackers-we-block https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection#trackers-we-block

lelandfe 4y ago
Yeah, there’s no way to account for everyone. It’s probably not fair to assume there’s a huge amount of untracked users. And Mozilla cops to the continuing decline as well: > “Looking back five years and looking at our market share and our own numbers that we publish, there's no denying the decline,” says Selena Deckelmann, senior vice president of Firefox https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-mozilla-2022/ https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-mozilla-2022/
- onli 4y ago
  If statcounter is in the list of blocked trackers, and trackers are blocked by default, then assuming there is a huge list of untracked users is only fair. Because it would be everyone not specifically disabling the tracking protection, which no one does. Statcounter would only count outdated FF installations that also do not use an adblocker (3% seems high for that, but not absurdly high). But I'm not certain that this is the case. https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection claims to link to lists that show which trackers are only identified and which are identified and blocked, but those links just go to https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protection https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti..., where I do not see such a distinction being made.
  - blendergeek 4y ago
    > If statcounter is in the list of blocked trackers, and trackers are blocked by default, then assuming there is a huge list of untracked users is only fair. Did we see a massive drop in Firefox users when tracking protection was introduced?
  - jefftk 4y ago
    Trackers are not blocked by default. You can verify this by visiting https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter in stock Firefox, and then again after setting "Enhanced Tracking Protection" to "Strict".
jefftk 4y ago
Firefox doesn't block statcounter or other analytics trackers by default. You'd have to go into "Settings > Enhanced Tracking Protection" and change it from "Standard" ("Balanced for protection and performance. Pages will load normally.") to "Strict" ("Stronger protection, but may cause some sites or contact a break.") While I expect Firefox users are much more likely than users of other browsers to do this, I'd also expect a large majority leave settings at the default. You can test behavior on this tracker here: https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter
- LeifCarrotson 4y ago
  Thanks for the tester, on Firefox I just see: <html><head></head><body><img src="https://statcounter.com/" vt9kpu8nj=""> </body></html> but uBlock Origin with default settings blocks the image.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    Looking in the browser networking panel is probably the easiest way to see whether it actually sends a request.
    - jmholla 4y ago
      The above poster is right. If you have uBlock Origin, it blocks it by default. I tested the following: 1. Plain install: Not blocked 2. With uBlock Origin: Blocked 3. Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection: Blocked 4. 2+3: Still blocked (unsurprisingly) I would expect knowledgeable and concerned users (i.e. installing at least uBlock Origin) and people on systems managed by such people (e.g. family members of people in the first group who let that person manage their system) to be a higher percentage of Firefox users than other browsers. I don't think Firefox has say a 10% share, but I do think that data derived from statcounter.com is going to underrepresent the share of Firefox users. As Google continues to make larger moves to fight ad-blocking, I expect that gap will widen.

lelandfe 4y ago

Yeah, there’s no way to account for everyone. It’s probably not fair to assume there’s a huge amount of untracked users. And Mozilla cops to the continuing decline as well: > “Looking back five years and looking at our market share and our own numbers that we publish, there's no denying the decline,” says Selena Deckelmann, senior vice president of Firefox https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-mozilla-2022/ https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-mozilla-2022/

onli 4y ago
If statcounter is in the list of blocked trackers, and trackers are blocked by default, then assuming there is a huge list of untracked users is only fair. Because it would be everyone not specifically disabling the tracking protection, which no one does. Statcounter would only count outdated FF installations that also do not use an adblocker (3% seems high for that, but not absurdly high). But I'm not certain that this is the case. https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection claims to link to lists that show which trackers are only identified and which are identified and blocked, but those links just go to https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protection https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti..., where I do not see such a distinction being made.
- blendergeek 4y ago
  > If statcounter is in the list of blocked trackers, and trackers are blocked by default, then assuming there is a huge list of untracked users is only fair. Did we see a massive drop in Firefox users when tracking protection was introduced?
- jefftk 4y ago
  Trackers are not blocked by default. You can verify this by visiting https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter in stock Firefox, and then again after setting "Enhanced Tracking Protection" to "Strict".

jefftk 4y ago

Firefox doesn't block statcounter or other analytics trackers by default. You'd have to go into "Settings > Enhanced Tracking Protection" and change it from "Standard" ("Balanced for protection and performance. Pages will load normally.") to "Strict" ("Stronger protection, but may cause some sites or contact a break.") While I expect Firefox users are much more likely than users of other browsers to do this, I'd also expect a large majority leave settings at the default. You can test behavior on this tracker here: https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter

LeifCarrotson 4y ago
Thanks for the tester, on Firefox I just see: <html><head></head><body><img src="https://statcounter.com/" vt9kpu8nj=""> </body></html> but uBlock Origin with default settings blocks the image.
- jefftk 4y ago
  Looking in the browser networking panel is probably the easiest way to see whether it actually sends a request.
  - jmholla 4y ago
    The above poster is right. If you have uBlock Origin, it blocks it by default. I tested the following: 1. Plain install: Not blocked 2. With uBlock Origin: Blocked 3. Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection: Blocked 4. 2+3: Still blocked (unsurprisingly) I would expect knowledgeable and concerned users (i.e. installing at least uBlock Origin) and people on systems managed by such people (e.g. family members of people in the first group who let that person manage their system) to be a higher percentage of Firefox users than other browsers. I don't think Firefox has say a 10% share, but I do think that data derived from statcounter.com is going to underrepresent the share of Firefox users. As Google continues to make larger moves to fight ad-blocking, I expect that gap will widen.