5 ms·

Amazing work. One concern is that the EasyPrivacy‎ list -- which is in my opinion overly aggressive -- is enabled by default. Most pertinently, it entirely dis

Amazing work. One concern is that the EasyPrivacy‎ list -- which is in my opinion overly aggressive -- is enabled by default. Most pertinently, it entirely disables Google Analytics on every site.

Rovanion 12y ago
Does the deactivation of Google Analytics impact the user negatively?
- coldpie 12y ago
  Arguably the sites they visit will be receiving skewed analytics against their particular use-case, so the site owners won't cater to their needs as much. That said, I still block GA.
- oconnore 12y ago
  They don't get the privilege of having their data analyzed and used to market products back to them. Some of the marketing people on here will probably find that to be horrendous. Where is my relevant promoted content?!
  - sjwright 12y ago
    If most geeks end up blocking GA (in most cases without realising it) then the audience of geek-focused content might end up being severely under-reported to publishers. This will only accelerate the mainstreamification of our culture.
    - oconnore 12y ago
      You ought to be supporting publishers that are important to you with your dollars, not with HTTP requests to Google Analytics.
    - quadrangle 12y ago
      You're right. We should all start reading all our spam messages and actively buying all the products we can tolerate. Otherwise, the spam will only be for crap we don't like…
- sjwright 12y ago
  Not directly, but it will affect the webmasters of non-commercial non-advertising websites if such block-lists become a default. If you've ever implemented GA, you know that Google has put a lot of effort into making their implementation extremely efficient and asynchronous. I personally think they should be rewarded for being considerate towards users' time and resources.
  - TheCraiggers 12y ago
    I see no reason to reward a mugger just because they're efficiently taking the money out of my wallet. Yes, they might get me on my way minutes faster than the less-professional muggers out there, but I still don't like the process or end result.
GrinningFool 12y ago
> it entirely disables Google Analytics on every site. Some might find being tracked across most of the Internet to be a privacy concern. People put google analytics on their site because of the 'free' data they get from google, and I suspect most don't consider that there is a cost - it's just their users that are paying it.
- sjwright 12y ago
  If you think GA is a privacy concern, you should consider services like gmail to be a privacy concern too. Perhaps they should block that too. "Paying for it"? GA doesn't do much that a webmaster couldn't otherwise learn by analysing their webserver log files.
  - oconnore 12y ago
    Yes, lots of people don't use gmail for this reason. GA does a lot that webmasters couldn't normally do -- specifically: to cross reference those requests with requests to almost every other website, and use that data to build a full profile of the user. (Granted, the full profile is not available to the webmaster, only to Google's ad targeting platform).
  - GrinningFool 12y ago
    >> If you think GA is a privacy concern, you should consider services like gmail to be a privacy concern too. Perhaps they should block that too. I'm not sure what one has to do with another. GA is something developers (or marketers) decide to pull into their sites, exposing their users to having their activity tracked across all sites that use GA. gmail is a product that someone elects to use. Apples and oranges. >> Paying for it"? GA doesn't do much that a webmaster couldn't otherwise learn by analysing their webserver log files. That's the unfortunate truth; and there are also many free packages that will do similar things -- all of which can be done without tracking people across most of the sites they visit. Still, none of them are as quick and convenient as dropping in a line of javascript. I just wish that more developers would give thought to whose data they're giving away when they drop in that line of javascript.
gorhill 12y ago
> EasyPrivacy‎ [...] it entirely disables Google Analytics on every site You are mistaken. Unless it changed since I ran the benchmark, EasyPrivacy doesn't always block Google Analytics. See diff of uBlock vs. ABP, both with EasyPrivacy selected: https://www.diffchecker.com/r7v1cq6x https://www.diffchecker.com/r7v1cq6x In uBlock, it is Peter Lowe's list, selected by default, which blocks Google Analytic with good reliability.
quadrangle 12y ago
The aggressors here are the people tracking everyone's activities not the ones blocking that tracking.

Amazing work. One concern is that the EasyPrivacy‎ list -- which is in my opinion overly aggressive -- is enabled by default. Most pertinently, it entirely disables Google Analytics on every site.

Rovanion 12y ago

Does the deactivation of Google Analytics impact the user negatively?

coldpie 12y ago
Arguably the sites they visit will be receiving skewed analytics against their particular use-case, so the site owners won't cater to their needs as much. That said, I still block GA.
oconnore 12y ago
They don't get the privilege of having their data analyzed and used to market products back to them. Some of the marketing people on here will probably find that to be horrendous. Where is my relevant promoted content?!
- sjwright 12y ago
  If most geeks end up blocking GA (in most cases without realising it) then the audience of geek-focused content might end up being severely under-reported to publishers. This will only accelerate the mainstreamification of our culture.
  - oconnore 12y ago
    You ought to be supporting publishers that are important to you with your dollars, not with HTTP requests to Google Analytics.
  - quadrangle 12y ago
    You're right. We should all start reading all our spam messages and actively buying all the products we can tolerate. Otherwise, the spam will only be for crap we don't like…
sjwright 12y ago
Not directly, but it will affect the webmasters of non-commercial non-advertising websites if such block-lists become a default. If you've ever implemented GA, you know that Google has put a lot of effort into making their implementation extremely efficient and asynchronous. I personally think they should be rewarded for being considerate towards users' time and resources.
- TheCraiggers 12y ago
  I see no reason to reward a mugger just because they're efficiently taking the money out of my wallet. Yes, they might get me on my way minutes faster than the less-professional muggers out there, but I still don't like the process or end result.

GrinningFool 12y ago

> it entirely disables Google Analytics on every site. Some might find being tracked across most of the Internet to be a privacy concern. People put google analytics on their site because of the 'free' data they get from google, and I suspect most don't consider that there is a cost - it's just their users that are paying it.

sjwright 12y ago
If you think GA is a privacy concern, you should consider services like gmail to be a privacy concern too. Perhaps they should block that too. "Paying for it"? GA doesn't do much that a webmaster couldn't otherwise learn by analysing their webserver log files.
- oconnore 12y ago
  Yes, lots of people don't use gmail for this reason. GA does a lot that webmasters couldn't normally do -- specifically: to cross reference those requests with requests to almost every other website, and use that data to build a full profile of the user. (Granted, the full profile is not available to the webmaster, only to Google's ad targeting platform).
- GrinningFool 12y ago
  >> If you think GA is a privacy concern, you should consider services like gmail to be a privacy concern too. Perhaps they should block that too. I'm not sure what one has to do with another. GA is something developers (or marketers) decide to pull into their sites, exposing their users to having their activity tracked across all sites that use GA. gmail is a product that someone elects to use. Apples and oranges. >> Paying for it"? GA doesn't do much that a webmaster couldn't otherwise learn by analysing their webserver log files. That's the unfortunate truth; and there are also many free packages that will do similar things -- all of which can be done without tracking people across most of the sites they visit. Still, none of them are as quick and convenient as dropping in a line of javascript. I just wish that more developers would give thought to whose data they're giving away when they drop in that line of javascript.

gorhill 12y ago

> EasyPrivacy‎ [...] it entirely disables Google Analytics on every site You are mistaken. Unless it changed since I ran the benchmark, EasyPrivacy doesn't always block Google Analytics. See diff of uBlock vs. ABP, both with EasyPrivacy selected: https://www.diffchecker.com/r7v1cq6x https://www.diffchecker.com/r7v1cq6x In uBlock, it is Peter Lowe's list, selected by default, which blocks Google Analytic with good reliability.

quadrangle 12y ago

The aggressors here are the people tracking everyone's activities not the ones blocking that tracking.