←back to thread

604 points wyldfire | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
dleslie ◴[] No.26344736[source]
This captures my feelings on the issue:

> That framing is based on a false premise that we have to choose between “old tracking” and “new tracking.” It’s not either-or. Instead of re-inventing the tracking wheel, we should imagine a better world without the myriad problems of targeted ads.

I don't want to be tracked. I never have wanted to be tracked. I shouldn't have to aggressively opt-out of tracking; it should be a service one must opt-in to receive. And it's not something we can trust industry to correct properly. This is precisely the role that privacy-protecting legislation should be undertaking.

Stop spying on us, please.

replies(10): >>26345317 #>>26345398 #>>26345438 #>>26345507 #>>26345714 #>>26346976 #>>26347529 #>>26347549 #>>26349806 #>>26350238 #
izacus ◴[] No.26345317[source]
What's tracking in your definition here? Is counting display of an ad tracking? Load of an image on page? Is logging nginx entry for your page load tracking? Is responding with correct image for your browser user-agent tracking?

I'm sometimes confused what is covered under this term and I'd kinda like to know where the line here is drawn. What exactly are we talking about here?

replies(2): >>26345587 #>>26345689 #
probably_wrong ◴[] No.26345689[source]
I fear that your questions reduce the problem to the point where no answer is possible. Loading the Y Combinator logo in here is almost certainly not tracking, but loading an invisible, 1px-by-1px gif in an email almost certainly counts. It's missing the forest for the trees.

The simplest definition of tracking I can come up with is "collect data about me that can (and often, is) used to build a profile of me and my behavior". The NGinx log could or could not be tracking, depending on whether you use it to diagnose issues ("we should optimize this picture, it's loading too slow for too many people") or to profile me ("ID 12345 uses a 56K modem, let's sell him a new one"). But no perfect definition exists because everyone has different thresholds of what they are okay with.

replies(4): >>26345820 #>>26346045 #>>26350151 #>>26353790 #
izacus ◴[] No.26345820[source]
If I understand FloC correctly though, it sends your profile/tags/interesting topics from your owned client software. So this basically means that if you have a browser like Firefox, it could send a preset cohort set to server that doesn't build your tracking profile and gives you things you're interested in.

To me this seems like a win? It allows you as a person to control how your ad profile is built (and if it's sent at all) and doesn't send your data to servers anymore?

(Please correct me if I misunderstood the technology.)

replies(4): >>26345894 #>>26347219 #>>26348706 #>>26348742 #
sodality2 ◴[] No.26345894[source]
If this doesn't get taken advantage of by google, this would be awesome.

I bet if a random open source project of the same kind were released, it would probably be pointed at as a reason why Google is evil ('see there are good alternatives!'). But because Google is doing it, people are (rightly) wary and (definitely not rightly) calling it evil without doing research.

replies(1): >>26347064 #
1. bogwog ◴[] No.26347064[source]
> But because Google is doing it, people are (rightly) wary and (definitely not rightly) calling it evil without doing research.

That's what happens when no one trusts you. It's human nature, and logical arguments aren't going to change that.

If anything, it's a good thing for society if Google burns despite trying to do something genuinely good (not that FLoC is good), because it shows others that there are real consequences to betraying the trust of your customers.

We lose one untrustworthy company today, and gain many trustworthy companies in the future. That's a net positive for society!