3 ms·

I think we'd see sites implement some sort of check to see if their ad scripts loaded properly, and ad/analytic providers enabling this through hooks. There wou

by lowboy 13y ago

I think we'd see sites implement some sort of check to see if their ad scripts loaded properly, and ad/analytic providers enabling this through hooks. There would probably be "good" providers that would get whitelisted. As a web user, I welcome this extension. It's my browser, and I should be able to control its IO. As a web developer... well, I've never been a fan of advertising-based revenue, but I'd like accurate analytics.

dictum 13y ago
I block most tracking services. I wish I didn't have to do that. I'd love if sites could get accurate analytics, as long as the data stays with the website owners (so, nothing from external companies and no pinging Google etc.), isn't shared with third parties (no, not even "trusted" third parties), retention times are not longer than 2 years, it's reasonably anonymized, etc. Until a trustworthy self-hosted analytics script that's fast and doesn't consume too many resources appears, my browser/OS and other info will remain underrepresented in websites' analytics dashboards.
- tomrod 13y ago
  What is your method to block things?
  - wtallis 13y ago
    NoScript takes care of most tracking systems (those loaded from third-party domains), and has surrogate scripts to prevent it from breaking websites that attempt to depend on the most common tracking scripts, and for this it is the first line of defense. AdBlock I use mostly for most common forms of single-pixel tracking images (and ads, of course), and Cookie Monster to manage cookie permissions, and BetterPrivacy to get rid of flash cookies. RequestPolicy is the nuclear option for when I'm feeling most paranoid. (EDIT: RequestPolicy's 1.0 betas have a default-allow mode, which makes it much easier to leave enabled during everyday use.) For me, the toughest thing is to figure out which cloudfront subdomains to allow.
wtallis 13y ago
> I think we'd see sites implement some sort of check to see if their ad scripts loaded properly, and ad/analytic providers enabling this through hooks. NoScript's surrogate scripts are the user's side of this arms race. I think it should be clear that the advertisers can only have as much success as any other DRM provider that relies solely on obfuscation while still trusting the client. Surrogate scripts can be updated more quickly than the multitude of web sites that need to verify that an ad was shown.

by lowboy 13y ago

dictum 13y ago

I block most tracking services. I wish I didn't have to do that. I'd love if sites could get accurate analytics, as long as the data stays with the website owners (so, nothing from external companies and no pinging Google etc.), isn't shared with third parties (no, not even "trusted" third parties), retention times are not longer than 2 years, it's reasonably anonymized, etc. Until a trustworthy self-hosted analytics script that's fast and doesn't consume too many resources appears, my browser/OS and other info will remain underrepresented in websites' analytics dashboards.

tomrod 13y ago
What is your method to block things?
- wtallis 13y ago
  NoScript takes care of most tracking systems (those loaded from third-party domains), and has surrogate scripts to prevent it from breaking websites that attempt to depend on the most common tracking scripts, and for this it is the first line of defense. AdBlock I use mostly for most common forms of single-pixel tracking images (and ads, of course), and Cookie Monster to manage cookie permissions, and BetterPrivacy to get rid of flash cookies. RequestPolicy is the nuclear option for when I'm feeling most paranoid. (EDIT: RequestPolicy's 1.0 betas have a default-allow mode, which makes it much easier to leave enabled during everyday use.) For me, the toughest thing is to figure out which cloudfront subdomains to allow.

wtallis 13y ago

> I think we'd see sites implement some sort of check to see if their ad scripts loaded properly, and ad/analytic providers enabling this through hooks. NoScript's surrogate scripts are the user's side of this arms race. I think it should be clear that the advertisers can only have as much success as any other DRM provider that relies solely on obfuscation while still trusting the client. Surrogate scripts can be updated more quickly than the multitude of web sites that need to verify that an ad was shown.