Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonhohle | Hacker News Reader

Until everyday people realize they’re being stalked, I don’t know what will change. I am seriously thinking about trying to go through the proposition process in my state to forbid selling of data (this should already run afoul of wiretapping laws, imho).

I thought having an ad campaign that targeted subgroups very specifically and boldly might be enough drum up public interest. Something like: “Hello $name from $city. How did $recent_embarrasing_purchase work out? I hope you enjoy your birthday in $birth_month.” And then a link to the proposed policy.

Unfortunately, marketers have neither scruples nor the ability to control themselves and have captured an asymmetric advantage. Technologists do what they do, preoccupied with whether or not they could, not stopping to think if they should. It seems like legislation may be the only remaining option.

View on HN

Pretty much what Signal did a few years ago [1], but on a bigger scale. Sadly Facebook banned their Ads account and couldn't do it further, would be interesting if someone tries the same.

[1] https://signal.org/blog/the-instagram-ads-you-will-never-see...

People realise they're being stalked, they don't know what that means though.

Techie people are convinced non-techie people don't know they're being tracked. They do! Ask your smart non-techie friends what they think about online privacy. I guarantee you they'll say something like "yeah, I know it's probably tracking me, but whachya gonna do".

Thanks to this disconnect, we have so many privacy campaigns with a message like "Did you know you can be uniquely identified on the web?", but so few (none?) that actually proceed to explain why that's bad, and what someone could do with that information. That's the missing piece. Give average people an actual reason to dislike or fear tracking, not just the mere curio that it exists.

I will admit that it always made me confused as to why browser has access to detailed hardware information. I can understand OS. I can understand resolution. I can rationalize GPU. I don't understand though why it should be able to access .. well, everything about the machine.

edit: It is still impressive. Even with the firefox settings on, the website was able to identify me. I am not entirely certain how I want to approach this.

I got me on iPhone through VPN change, clear cache, private window, and reboot.

I know what to think about this… I fucking hate it.

That I can relate to, but the more immediate question is whether you are willing to adjust your habits to nullify its impact. Most people would not.

Note that there's also:

  Settings > Safari > Advanced > Experimental Features

where you can disable OpenGL and such (i haven't tested yet.)

So i just found that the "SnowHaze" browser prevents fingerprinting on fingerprint.com and https://browserleaks.com/canvas

• https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/snowhaze/id1121026941?l=en

• https://github.com/snowhaze/SnowHaze-iOS

I would assume for more advanced browser features, like 4k video playing, that hardware information could tell the player whether your machine is capable of playing back 4k video without stuttering.

Because the browser has become a vendor neutral, architecture neutral app engine and people want to do things like play MIDI instruments, use serial ports, use proprietary USB check scanners for accounting/ERP apps that work on the web and don't need SCCM to manage, etc.

yeah, but it should ask you if you want to allow the website to know this kind of stuff instead of just allowing it by default

> people want to

Some people want to do those things and for very specific websites. Most people don't even know what MIDI or serial ports are.

edit/ update from original post cuz i cant edit anymore

So quick update since I am mildly obsessive.

I was sure it was either GPU, CPU or addons that were giving me away ( I do have a mildly unique setup ).

I ran few tests in VM and the moment I dropped GPU passthrough ( left CPU passthrough ), I was no longer ( based on that website anyway ) tracked across sessions.

In other words, cat and mouse game continues.

> I can understand OS. I can understand resolution. I can rationalize GPU.

None of these should be available to websites by default. The first two come from simpler times when people were not as concerned with privacy implications. The third has been and continues to be pushed by advertising companies (Google, Apple, Microsoft).

> Until everyday people realize they’re being stalked, I don’t know what will change.

FTFY: People already know; nothing will change.

Many of the things that are happening (at least in the US) are deeply, deeply unpopular, but are not changing, and show no signs that they are even susceptible to change. Fortune-sized companies, the 1%, and the deep state are calling the shots, despite how much can be seen in real time, through things like Twitter and TikTok. I've actually had to pull back from Twitter because of all the things that are obviously beyond the pale, yet will never change. (Snowden, Assange, et. al.)

That’s why I, unfortunately, think legislation is necessary. My state allows citizen proposals with 250k signatures to get on ballot and >50% support to become law that cannot be overturned by the legislature (that has its own issues, but in this case it would be binding).

>> I thought having an ad campaign that targeted subgroups very specifically a

This has been tried by a guy who placed Facebook ads like these. FB blocked his account in a few hours.

So good in theory, wont work in practice

I would consider donating to such an effort. I'm sure there are others like me.

Yeah man, I think that's the only way anything is going to change

People are such dumb fucking cattle that they'll lash out at you rather than the data brokers or the software vendors who ratted them out though

> they'll lash out at you

Not only that, but they might have a legal case against you. I've been slowly working through Seek and Hide: The Tangled History of the Right to Privacy, and my main takeaways have been:

(1) The constitutional right to free speech and a free press is not as broad as most people probably think.

(2) Truth is not necessarily an air-tight defense in a case of libel, as courts at various times and places have decided against publishers for true but embarrassing things intended to humiliate or harm.

Maybe the trick would be to put it into a security envelope so you don't disclose anything.. although I personally love the idea of printing it on a postcard, since it's practically public record once a data broker gets his filthy paws on it anyway

Ad platforms aren't that stupid.

Do it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com