3 ms·

I'm prepared for this kind of feedback, but please – no need to be rude. Let me give you more context. DataUnlocker has a long history and comes from years of

I'm prepared for this kind of feedback, but please – no need to be rude. Let me give you more context. DataUnlocker has a long history and comes from years of hard work, mainly to help developers and product teams deal with missing data. If you’re in tech or marketing, you know how critical accurate metrics are – attribution, conversion rates, traffic volumes. The goal isn't to track individuals – it's to ensure these metrics aren't broken. I’d ask you to consider this perspective: - People who want to stay anonymous, will stay anonymous. DataUnlocker doesn’t interfere with that at all! - It fixes just the technical accounting of data. Things like location masking, anti-fingerprinting, VPN use, etc., – all still apply and protect your privacy (and moreover I can confirm there's no way around them). Hence, even on websites which don't respect your privacy (there are not many, to be completely honest) and try to misuse tracking, blocker users would still appear as anonymous, ID-less visitors. That’s by design, here to stay – and I can assure this from my experience. DataUnlocker just. Fixes. Tech. (think of it like DataUnlocker making web apps behave more like mobile apps — hard to tamper with)

pickleglitch 1y ago
Sorry, not sorry. Spin it however you want to help yourself sleep at night, but this product exists to capture data that users don't want captured, and I find that to be rude. Even if the data is "anonymous", it's still fed into algorithms and LLMs built explicitly for mass manipulation. And even anonymized data can be de-anonymized if you have enough points of cross reference. Accurate metrics may be useful, but business got along just fine without all this data for centuries, so to say they are critical is a joke. Targeted advertising might make a lot of money for a very small number of people, but it has been a disaster for society at large.
- nikitaeverywher 1y ago
  I'm a tech person who works with data tools and back/front end code daily, this is fun to explain. Businesses have back end data collection for centuries you can't avoid. It's limited, but it's still enough for all that absurd manipulation conspiracy you believe in. Period – no need to even start discussing blocker software. Yes, indeed, the world generates data, and it can be analyzed. Not a surprise. This data is inevitably generated: every single machine you connect to via network records something. As soon as you buy internet from your internet provider, you're on a digital paper. Typically, back ends log user's IP, user agent and pages you access, regardless of the software and VPNs you have. Hence, by your own logic, there's enough data points already. Now, having something from JavaScript can enrich this data. That's perhaps what you want to avoid. The question to ask is, why. The most important data is already captured. When your blocker blocks Google Analytics for instance, you kind of just opt out of showing your 1 visit of "example.com/some-article" to the website's owner, because they're not spending 10s of hours to implement back end tracking. That's really all it changes. You're still profiled by your internet provider, even more than Google Analytics. You're still giving your data to your DNS provider. If using privacy VPN, what makes you sure they don't store your data somewhere? I believe all these Masonic conspiracies about Big Brother play into the hands of those who sell you a "protection" from the imaginary "surveillance" of you on the Internet. Or if you don't pay, you tell it to others (like me) – and some % will pay for it. We see what we want to see, it's a game on both sides, with a large user base on them both. The best part: It's impossible to know whether a random site on the internet doesn't "track" you in one way or another, with or without DataUnlocker, even if you install all protections available on this mother Earth [I personally believe using Tor browser is enough]. You can't prohibit JavaScript, C#, Java. Filter lists maintained by ad blocking community we monitor are updated nearly hourly, new and new entries appear, but they can't cover the entire web. HUGE WORK to try to maintain EVERY WEBSITE, reminds me of writing "cracks" to software in 2000s, but this time for imaginary value – only to get down ~50% of client-side tracking (0% server-side, in the meaning of what servers collect – IPs and user agents). What matters really in this context is that this % will never be 100%. Think about it – the real value from all that tracking prevention is *lowering the number of KBs transferred over the network*, which maybe speeds up a website for a fraction of a second, along with not telling website owners what page of a website [they've built for you] you tried to visit. A real-life analogy is you demand to be unseen when you walk out of your house and go shopping. Have no passport. Etc. Not possible. Physically. Can it be minimized? Yes it can. But what it really changes for you?
  - pickleglitch 1y ago
    The fact that you think using big data to manipulate the masses is a conspiracy theory tells me there's no point in discussing this with you further. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychological-weapons-of-mass-persuasion/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychological-wea...
    - nikitaeverywher 1y ago
      You seem to just not get it I said there always will be data to manipulate masses. If all of us use blockers, masses will be manipulated based on back end (and other available) data. No way to escape that, and blockers won't change it.

pickleglitch 1y ago

Sorry, not sorry. Spin it however you want to help yourself sleep at night, but this product exists to capture data that users don't want captured, and I find that to be rude. Even if the data is "anonymous", it's still fed into algorithms and LLMs built explicitly for mass manipulation. And even anonymized data can be de-anonymized if you have enough points of cross reference. Accurate metrics may be useful, but business got along just fine without all this data for centuries, so to say they are critical is a joke. Targeted advertising might make a lot of money for a very small number of people, but it has been a disaster for society at large.

nikitaeverywher 1y ago
I'm a tech person who works with data tools and back/front end code daily, this is fun to explain. Businesses have back end data collection for centuries you can't avoid. It's limited, but it's still enough for all that absurd manipulation conspiracy you believe in. Period – no need to even start discussing blocker software. Yes, indeed, the world generates data, and it can be analyzed. Not a surprise. This data is inevitably generated: every single machine you connect to via network records something. As soon as you buy internet from your internet provider, you're on a digital paper. Typically, back ends log user's IP, user agent and pages you access, regardless of the software and VPNs you have. Hence, by your own logic, there's enough data points already. Now, having something from JavaScript can enrich this data. That's perhaps what you want to avoid. The question to ask is, why. The most important data is already captured. When your blocker blocks Google Analytics for instance, you kind of just opt out of showing your 1 visit of "example.com/some-article" to the website's owner, because they're not spending 10s of hours to implement back end tracking. That's really all it changes. You're still profiled by your internet provider, even more than Google Analytics. You're still giving your data to your DNS provider. If using privacy VPN, what makes you sure they don't store your data somewhere? I believe all these Masonic conspiracies about Big Brother play into the hands of those who sell you a "protection" from the imaginary "surveillance" of you on the Internet. Or if you don't pay, you tell it to others (like me) – and some % will pay for it. We see what we want to see, it's a game on both sides, with a large user base on them both. The best part: It's impossible to know whether a random site on the internet doesn't "track" you in one way or another, with or without DataUnlocker, even if you install all protections available on this mother Earth [I personally believe using Tor browser is enough]. You can't prohibit JavaScript, C#, Java. Filter lists maintained by ad blocking community we monitor are updated nearly hourly, new and new entries appear, but they can't cover the entire web. HUGE WORK to try to maintain EVERY WEBSITE, reminds me of writing "cracks" to software in 2000s, but this time for imaginary value – only to get down ~50% of client-side tracking (0% server-side, in the meaning of what servers collect – IPs and user agents). What matters really in this context is that this % will never be 100%. Think about it – the real value from all that tracking prevention is *lowering the number of KBs transferred over the network*, which maybe speeds up a website for a fraction of a second, along with not telling website owners what page of a website [they've built for you] you tried to visit. A real-life analogy is you demand to be unseen when you walk out of your house and go shopping. Have no passport. Etc. Not possible. Physically. Can it be minimized? Yes it can. But what it really changes for you?
- pickleglitch 1y ago
  The fact that you think using big data to manipulate the masses is a conspiracy theory tells me there's no point in discussing this with you further. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychological-weapons-of-mass-persuasion/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychological-wea...
  - nikitaeverywher 1y ago
    You seem to just not get it I said there always will be data to manipulate masses. If all of us use blockers, masses will be manipulated based on back end (and other available) data. No way to escape that, and blockers won't change it.