4 ms·

> In order to avoid this type of data collection, you'd have to walk around with a dumbphone, avoid using any bank-connected services and basically only log on

> In order to avoid this type of data collection, you'd have to walk around with a dumbphone, avoid using any bank-connected services and basically only log on to the Internet via a VPN. Ironically, this usage pattern is so far out of the ordinary that it would make you stick out like a sore thumb. Have you considered trying this, or some implementation of it? I, for one, would like to see websites that didn't install any tracking software. Specifically, I mean no Google metrics. If there was a news website that didn't install any tracking software, but instead just offered pages with cryptocurrency addresses, I would switch to that as my default news source in a second.

rev_bird 12y ago
Google metrics aren't always used for spying on people -- news sites in particular drool over every possible metric to measure popularity, referrals, etc. to better tailor their online marketing (and sometimes story selection). It sounds weird, but I'm not sure a website without tracking would be as good.
- pdkl95 12y ago
  Website owners can still get most of their metrics without google the same way we did it before google existed: they can analyze their Apache/Nginx logfiles. Stats is hard? Find some software that does if for you. Better yet, figure out how to do some of it yourself (it's not paritc8ularly hard). Or hire some statisticians. This way, you free your business from being dependent on a 3rd party.
- sroerick 12y ago
  No, I don't think it would be. For a company to announce that they were forgoing tracking would be a brave step. I understand that analytics is a really really useful thing for a company. But, as a corrolary, what if Google Analytics alters the content in a way that makes it less useful? The obvious example here is clickbait articles (See, Clickhole), but I think there's other more subtle problems here. Isn't the job of a reporter to report what _they_ think is news, rather than what people want to read? Beyond that, I am troubled by the spying on people. It occurs to me that even if I remove Google Analytics from my website, anyone coming to or going from my website will be subject to monitoring by Google. It's not exactly opt out. Microtransactions are hard, though, that problem still hasn't been solved.
XorNot 12y ago
"If there was a news website that didn't install any tracking software, but instead just offered pages with cryptocurrency addresses, I would switch to that as my default news source in a second." No you wouldn't. You might be hard-minded enough to try and commit to it, but instead you'd almost certainly just stop reading any news...then go back to aggregators/blogs whatever. It's a well studied problem that as soon as something becomes not free, people change their behaviour dramatically. Of course, if you really don't care about the news (and broadly normals news websites are pretty useless to me), then you can cheaply skip a step...
- sroerick 12y ago
  > No you wouldn't. You might be hard-minded enough to try and commit to it, but instead you'd almost certainly just stop reading any news...then go back to aggregators/blogs whatever. Yes I would. I do soft boycotts of all music that isn't Creative Commons, and movies by major media companies. I've listened to almost exclusively free music for years. (Libre music for close to 6 mo.) I still go to movies sometimes, but who cares? The point of a boycott isn't necessarily to hurt a company's revenue, it's also to drive change in consumption habits. I'm not trying to quit the normal web altogether, I'm just saying that if there were ONE news website that didn't have tracking software installed, I would switch to it as my default news source. I can't say for sure if I would donate to articles via a bitcoin link, but I would imagine it would be optional. HN is nice, but it's just an aggregator. Even though it doesn't have tracking software, everything that it links to does. EDIT: Oh, and I meant to say, I have indeed switched to a dumbphone, and I use a VPN. I still use bank related services, but I try to use bitcoin when I can. I have no illusions about its anonymity, I just try to vote with my feet and my dollars. Just because there are a lot of consumers who don't change their consumption habits doesn't mean that some won't.
  - XorNot 12y ago
    Creative Commons is different - you don't pay. The point I was making was that the act of knowing that every click through was costing you some small but real amount of money, would change your behavior dramatically. So that's the challenge: you need no tracking, but no obvious fees either.

rev_bird 12y ago

Google metrics aren't always used for spying on people -- news sites in particular drool over every possible metric to measure popularity, referrals, etc. to better tailor their online marketing (and sometimes story selection). It sounds weird, but I'm not sure a website without tracking would be as good.

pdkl95 12y ago
Website owners can still get most of their metrics without google the same way we did it before google existed: they can analyze their Apache/Nginx logfiles. Stats is hard? Find some software that does if for you. Better yet, figure out how to do some of it yourself (it's not paritc8ularly hard). Or hire some statisticians. This way, you free your business from being dependent on a 3rd party.
sroerick 12y ago
No, I don't think it would be. For a company to announce that they were forgoing tracking would be a brave step. I understand that analytics is a really really useful thing for a company. But, as a corrolary, what if Google Analytics alters the content in a way that makes it less useful? The obvious example here is clickbait articles (See, Clickhole), but I think there's other more subtle problems here. Isn't the job of a reporter to report what _they_ think is news, rather than what people want to read? Beyond that, I am troubled by the spying on people. It occurs to me that even if I remove Google Analytics from my website, anyone coming to or going from my website will be subject to monitoring by Google. It's not exactly opt out. Microtransactions are hard, though, that problem still hasn't been solved.

XorNot 12y ago

"If there was a news website that didn't install any tracking software, but instead just offered pages with cryptocurrency addresses, I would switch to that as my default news source in a second." No you wouldn't. You might be hard-minded enough to try and commit to it, but instead you'd almost certainly just stop reading any news...then go back to aggregators/blogs whatever. It's a well studied problem that as soon as something becomes not free, people change their behaviour dramatically. Of course, if you really don't care about the news (and broadly normals news websites are pretty useless to me), then you can cheaply skip a step...

sroerick 12y ago
> No you wouldn't. You might be hard-minded enough to try and commit to it, but instead you'd almost certainly just stop reading any news...then go back to aggregators/blogs whatever. Yes I would. I do soft boycotts of all music that isn't Creative Commons, and movies by major media companies. I've listened to almost exclusively free music for years. (Libre music for close to 6 mo.) I still go to movies sometimes, but who cares? The point of a boycott isn't necessarily to hurt a company's revenue, it's also to drive change in consumption habits. I'm not trying to quit the normal web altogether, I'm just saying that if there were ONE news website that didn't have tracking software installed, I would switch to it as my default news source. I can't say for sure if I would donate to articles via a bitcoin link, but I would imagine it would be optional. HN is nice, but it's just an aggregator. Even though it doesn't have tracking software, everything that it links to does. EDIT: Oh, and I meant to say, I have indeed switched to a dumbphone, and I use a VPN. I still use bank related services, but I try to use bitcoin when I can. I have no illusions about its anonymity, I just try to vote with my feet and my dollars. Just because there are a lot of consumers who don't change their consumption habits doesn't mean that some won't.
- XorNot 12y ago
  Creative Commons is different - you don't pay. The point I was making was that the act of knowing that every click through was costing you some small but real amount of money, would change your behavior dramatically. So that's the challenge: you need no tracking, but no obvious fees either.