Adblock Plus Parent Company Eyeo GmbH Founded

What does a hat have to do with privacy? Don't forget, we're talking about a tracking service - Google Analytics.

Tracking services by nature... well, they track. A hat is simply a hat, and will never violate your privacy or force you to expose your privacy. Something that Google is doing with their GA, by forcing it when updating Google Chrome or installing extensions. And, in what comes to privacy, one should be able to allow or deny such privacy to be given away.

It's my opinion. You have yours, and I respect it. I don't understand it, but I respect it.

You don't see it as a problem. I see it as one. And, that's how life is, right? We can't all agree to the same.

 

What's the real deal with this "opting out" anyway ?
The sites (pretty much all sites this day) that have the GA script loading into your browser aren't aware of your opting out status anyway.

So, after all it still comes down to this anyway :

"Hey Google, this is the browser from user X on site Y , what's the status of his opting out please ?"

User X on Site Y at xx:xx:xx on xx/xx/xx, it's all there, so the real question is, what's the purpose of the opting out after all ?

 

Really? We're back to Google forcing even though we know that they aren't (again, there's an opt out. You aren't forced to use GA you're only forced to opt out a certain way)?

I agree. And I think we've already covered that one is entirely in control here of GA - you can very easily allow it or deny it.

Haha, same here.

 

Not sure what you mean.

The sites are fully aware of your opting out status. It's kept in a persistent cookie.

 

OK. I see it this way. GA is a tracking service.Google decided that Google Chrome users, after 3 years of using Google Chrome, now "need" GA to update their browser. This is nothing but to track users. There's no way around it, GA is a tracking service, and therefore it's tracking users.

So, IMO, it's forcing it. It's my opinion. It's how I see it. It's not giving the option to opt-in, either.

As you say, it's giving the option to opt-out, with their extension, but it's not an easy opt-out. And, I'll explain why.

While upgrading/installing Google Chrome, there's no message asking the user whether he/she wants to opt-in or opt-out of GA. Unless the user is aware of this specific extension, then the user has no opt-out, does he/she? But, the user does automatically opt-in to a service that only has one purpose - track.

No.

And, while installing Google Chrome, Google doesn't advertise it either, does it? So, unless someone is aware of this extension, then how is this someone going to have an opt-out? He/she won't.

There are never easy opt-outs, and this is just one more example.

 

It used to be a certain way for 3 years or more. (Some) people just don't like changes without any explanations.

 

Yeah, I can't imagine how you think it's forcing when there's an opt out. It's like... the definition of not forcing. There's literally the choice to opt out.

So? The option still exists. 500 people a week install the extensions. Coupons exist and people don't necessarily know about them.

Again, just because the user doesn't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If they have privacy concerns they can do a simple google search (lol) and find it.

Maybe so. But it exists.

Saying that the opt out is bad because it isn't advertised or becuase it's the only option for blocking tracking is something I just don't get.

Really, I'm surprised they offer the opt-out at all. When you opt out you are getting their product and giving nothign back. How often does that happen?

 

I just had to open my mouth about Google, lol.

 

Google?

"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

Oh sorry, I thought you said 'Borg', I keep getting the two confused. Now, which one actually has taken over the world & which one is fictional?

 

Yawn. Just use some other browser. Just use some other search engine. Just use some other OS.

 

Hungry Man, you like Google practices... it's fine by me. I don't care at all about what you like or not. I don't have to fight for what you like or think how things should be like. I fight for what I like and believe. That's life. If we happen to enjoy the same things, then we both fight for the same and even join the same fight. lol

You like Google Chrome, use it. You don't mind Google Analytics, ads, etc., allow it all, don't block it.

You did say you block ads, for example. Why are you blocking ads, if websites owners need the revenue to survive? Allow the ads. Don't block them. Heck, allow third-party cookies, since you don't mind tracking.

But, those using Google Chrome already pay for it. Google Chrome's default search engine is Google's search engine. I believe that most people using Google Chrome use Google's search engine. Many people using other browsers also use it. It's a great search engine. Then, in the search engine they display ads.

That's all fine, and I couldn't agree more to it. But, what I dislike, is that Google Analytics is all about tracking.

I remember Google took away their old way of tracking Google Chrome installations with their unique ID. It used to be placed in a file in Chrome's user profile.
Then, after some pressure, they took it away. But, what some people didn't know is that they actually changed this unique ID to the registry. Then, they also took it away.

Perhaps you were OK with this unique ID as well?

Maybe Google Analytics was the way they found to bring this unique ID tracking back... (This is not an affirmation, it's a doubt, so let's not say I'm giving any facts, please.)

But, the point is, people do care, and sometimes, Google is forced to listen, even if they don't like it.
Maybe someone else, with more power in the privacy matters or whatever will start talking about it, and Google will take it back.

Who knows... What I know is that others do care, and sometimes their actions do make a difference.

 

I'd absolutely stop blocking ads. I fully intend to stop blocking them, as I've said in this topic, when they stop being so damn annoying.

I don't block ads on gmail or facebook.

I was ok with the unique ID. I'd still be ok with it.

All of this is irrelevant. The only thing we seem to disagree on is that the opt-out method is right or wrong. I think it's a good thing you think it's a bad thing.

Seems simple enough.

 

Always nice to see great projects like this advancing further.