@aral For things hosted where there's limited ability to add HTTP Headers, do you know if a meta tag works for setting the Permissions-Policy?
@aral Hey, I like your website about raising awareness about this issue.
I’d like to share my own take on this issue with you however.
Instead of complying with Google and kindly asking them to not track your site with the interest-cohort=() policy, I suggest giving users that visit your site with with a FLoC enabled browser a popup asking them to install a different browser.
@ricardo Would you consider doing both? That way, you will also help protect people who may be forced to use Chrome. (e.g., if they lack the technical know-how to install a different browser or if they’re forced to use Chrome for work, etc.)
That said, a banner campaign is also a good idea.
@aral Done :-) Pull request is on its way. Thanks for this GREAT summary. I love to spread the word!
@aral FLoC, combined with the identity-focused UID2 will seriously undermine our privacy.
As the EFF puts it: "Deployed together, they could be a potent surveillance cocktail: specific, cross-context identifiers connected to comprehensive behavioral labels."
@aral what's your take on this: https://seirdy.one/2021/04/16/permissions-policy-floc-misinfo.html wrt Floc?
@ton “Sites which interest cohorts will be calculated on
All sites with publicly routable IP addresses that the user visits when not in incognito mode will be included in the POC cohort calculation.”
The confusion here appears to be:
1. Whether visiting your site is used to profile people
2. Whether your site actually makes use of cohort data via the JS call
The above quote says to me that the profiling occurs unless the site opts out.
@ton That said, the ambiguity itself works in Google’s favour, not to mention that its implementation will, of course, be in line with its business model.
@aral Like the statement. But please consider using another image than the kraken as it is an antisemitic trope
@michakees @aral There was an extended discussion about this topic ongoing about one year ago at @kuketzblog : https://www.kuketz-blog.de/datenkrake-ein-problematischer-begriff/
So his/her summary was to use it as a word isn't as problematic as using it as a cartoon.
@michakees Hey Michael, I appreciate that the image of an octopus has been historically/even recently used for this purpose but I’m not sure that comparing a multinational corporation to a Giant squid from Norse mythology has the same connotation. That said, do you have any suggestions for alternative metaphors?
We fell for the same discussion wit @michakees recently 😅 I'm yet not fully convinced that a kraken is antisemitic under all circumstances, but it looks like the community favours a full ban. Finally we figured out that a predatory raccoon or a greedy hamster with a bag is a even better symbol. You find them already as stock vectors. Our front illustration is even CC.
i was confused by the above post too. but then went to do some research.
think of it like this - similar to swastika, which is ancient mythological symbol, the kraken/octopus was used by antisemitic literature, nazi propaganda and conspiracy theory writers as a symbol of world domination by jews. it simply carries this connotation to many. i didn't know that but it now makes a lot of sense.
@aral how about a vacuum cleaner?
I can't see how a kraken relates to something which collects data anyway. you ever saw a kraken using a notebook or collecting data? I mean, what is that even suppose to tell me? And why the hell is this called "bloody" at all?
Did I missed the moment when we started using stupid marketing wording to fight for data protection no matter how antisemitic it might be?
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!