5 ms·

And just about the first thing you see when trying to install it… Vivaldi may collect visitor statistics. The visitor statistics may include information about

by lelf 12y ago

And just about the first thing you see when trying to install it… Vivaldi may collect visitor statistics. The visitor statistics may include information about the visitors IP-addresses, usage patterns, <…> I guess I don't want your shiny new browser.

sanderjd 12y ago
At least it's one of the first things you see!
- themodelplumber 12y ago
  But for "advanced" users this is a turnoff. I wonder what they are getting paid per-user, and if that amount is greater than what they'd make if they just charged for the app.
mrkurt 12y ago
Every website collects that stuff.
- skymt 12y ago
  Most websites don't collect that stuff across every other website.
  - jodrellblank 12y ago
    Most don't. A surprising amount do - any page that embeds a Facebook 'like' button loaded from Facebook servers with a referrer header ... or JQuery hosted by Google or a Doubleclick advert or a reTweet button, and on and on.
    - joshontheweb 12y ago
      This is why I stay logged out of facebook and don't allow third party cookies. Trying to move off of gmail also so I am not always logged in there either. Probably not perfect but hopefully it foils a lot of attempts at tracking.
      - bhayden 12y ago
        Install AdBlock, Disconnect, uninstall Flash and Java, and use a JavaScript blocker and you'll make a good dent in a website's ability to track you.
        ianlevesque 12y ago
        And make a good dent in your ability to browse websites.
        bhayden 12y ago
        You re-enable JS on the sites that you visit often and I've never had an issue.
        SixSigma 12y ago
        Are you speaking from experience or out of thin air? Because that is not my experience.
        tunap 12y ago
        I block all scripts globally, flash heavy sites do not load and I consider that a 'feature'. Frankly, surfing the web without NoScript & AdBlock is an experience I do not want and have learned to do without. IF I need drivers or need access or ecommerce I'll allow the main site to run temporarily in Sandboxie or use tools/alt approaches to get the data without 7 or 8 ad servers running. The false promise of the internet is easily eschewed when you take a pragmatic approach to it. Also: I was looking for something on mainstream retailer sites and was amazed at the list of servers. How many TargetImg servers does it take to load a product page? Answer: At least four, plus all the other tracking/ad loading detritus. Just wow.
    - dredmorbius 12y ago
      Strictly: that's not "most websites", it's "many services". Facebook "likes", Google analytics, New Relic monitoring, and any of numerous other tools can do this. Which is why I'm loaded for bear with noscript, adblock, Privacy Badger, Ghostery, and numerous entries in my /etc/hosts file for particularly noxious / ubiquitous sites.
  - mrkurt 12y ago
    Oh, well, missed that. That's what I get for replying to an out of context snippet.
LLWM 12y ago
It's perfectly reasonable to expect extra data to be collected when using prerelease versions of software. Complaining about it now is premature.
- e1ven 12y ago
  That's not a tradeoff I'm comfortable with, "even" in pre-release software. I'm not accusing you of this, but in other cases I've seen proponents of something say "This isn't a big deal, it's just starting out". Then, when people continue to complain a year from now, the defenders say "This isn't a big deal, it's always done this." Vivaldi looks interesting, but I'd wager that there's a decent overlap between the Power Users they're after, and the group that values their privacy the most.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - LLWM 12y ago
    Privacy has nothing to do with it. If the software is not yet ready, users are expected to encounter serious bugs. Your QA department is paid to help provide you with information to diagnose and troubleshoot those bugs, but users aren't, so you need to collect that automatically.
- chaz72 12y ago
  If they explicitly say they will stop in the release version, I would accept that argument. If not...
- cbd1984 12y ago
  > It's perfectly reasonable to expect extra data to be collected when using prerelease versions of software. This is incorrect in the world I live in, and I do not want to visit a world where it is correct.
  - LLWM 12y ago
    You're in the wrong world then, buddy. If the software is not yet ready, users are expected to encounter serious bugs. Your QA department is paid to help provide you with information to diagnose and troubleshoot those bugs, but users aren't, so you need to collect that automatically.

by lelf 12y ago

sanderjd 12y ago

At least it's one of the first things you see!

themodelplumber 12y ago
But for "advanced" users this is a turnoff. I wonder what they are getting paid per-user, and if that amount is greater than what they'd make if they just charged for the app.

mrkurt 12y ago

Every website collects that stuff.

skymt 12y ago
Most websites don't collect that stuff across every other website.
- jodrellblank 12y ago
  Most don't. A surprising amount do - any page that embeds a Facebook 'like' button loaded from Facebook servers with a referrer header ... or JQuery hosted by Google or a Doubleclick advert or a reTweet button, and on and on.
  - joshontheweb 12y ago
    This is why I stay logged out of facebook and don't allow third party cookies. Trying to move off of gmail also so I am not always logged in there either. Probably not perfect but hopefully it foils a lot of attempts at tracking.
    - bhayden 12y ago
      Install AdBlock, Disconnect, uninstall Flash and Java, and use a JavaScript blocker and you'll make a good dent in a website's ability to track you.
      - ianlevesque 12y ago
        And make a good dent in your ability to browse websites.
        bhayden 12y ago
        You re-enable JS on the sites that you visit often and I've never had an issue.
        SixSigma 12y ago
        Are you speaking from experience or out of thin air? Because that is not my experience.
        tunap 12y ago
        I block all scripts globally, flash heavy sites do not load and I consider that a 'feature'. Frankly, surfing the web without NoScript & AdBlock is an experience I do not want and have learned to do without. IF I need drivers or need access or ecommerce I'll allow the main site to run temporarily in Sandboxie or use tools/alt approaches to get the data without 7 or 8 ad servers running. The false promise of the internet is easily eschewed when you take a pragmatic approach to it. Also: I was looking for something on mainstream retailer sites and was amazed at the list of servers. How many TargetImg servers does it take to load a product page? Answer: At least four, plus all the other tracking/ad loading detritus. Just wow.
  - dredmorbius 12y ago
    Strictly: that's not "most websites", it's "many services". Facebook "likes", Google analytics, New Relic monitoring, and any of numerous other tools can do this. Which is why I'm loaded for bear with noscript, adblock, Privacy Badger, Ghostery, and numerous entries in my /etc/hosts file for particularly noxious / ubiquitous sites.
- mrkurt 12y ago
  Oh, well, missed that. That's what I get for replying to an out of context snippet.

LLWM 12y ago

It's perfectly reasonable to expect extra data to be collected when using prerelease versions of software. Complaining about it now is premature.

e1ven 12y ago
That's not a tradeoff I'm comfortable with, "even" in pre-release software. I'm not accusing you of this, but in other cases I've seen proponents of something say "This isn't a big deal, it's just starting out". Then, when people continue to complain a year from now, the defenders say "This isn't a big deal, it's always done this." Vivaldi looks interesting, but I'd wager that there's a decent overlap between the Power Users they're after, and the group that values their privacy the most.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- LLWM 12y ago
  Privacy has nothing to do with it. If the software is not yet ready, users are expected to encounter serious bugs. Your QA department is paid to help provide you with information to diagnose and troubleshoot those bugs, but users aren't, so you need to collect that automatically.
chaz72 12y ago
If they explicitly say they will stop in the release version, I would accept that argument. If not...
cbd1984 12y ago
> It's perfectly reasonable to expect extra data to be collected when using prerelease versions of software. This is incorrect in the world I live in, and I do not want to visit a world where it is correct.
- LLWM 12y ago
  You're in the wrong world then, buddy. If the software is not yet ready, users are expected to encounter serious bugs. Your QA department is paid to help provide you with information to diagnose and troubleshoot those bugs, but users aren't, so you need to collect that automatically.