
I don't think you browse like I do - buro9
http://blog.microco.sm/2012/02/04/i-dont-think-you-browse-like-i-do/
======
robryan
This just really doesn't bother me, Google knows some stuff about me due to
what I have told them and machine learning, they use it primarily to show me
ads they think will convert better. This makes Google more money, the
advertiser more money and makes it much more likely that the ads will actually
be useful to me, pretty much win win win.

~~~
Nic0
I don't think the problem is what do they actually do with all those data, but
what could happen with it. You can't be sure that in few years, they will use
data for something else that ads, something that you're not agree, but
meanwhile data are collected. You can't be sure what could happen with
Google's data in 5 or 10 years. Sold ? After all, Google is a company, here to
make money. Or even some weird law, allow government accessing those data, to
track terrorism profile. Ok, maybe it's unlikely, but you can't be sure. What
I'm sure of is that loads of data worths loads of money.

~~~
Jach
> I don't think the problem is what do they actually do with all those data,
> but what could happen with it.

This is FUD, plain and simple. While I don't advocate sticking one's head in
the sand and refusing to predict or even speculate, it's easy to do too much
predicting and speculating (and very prone to bias), it's easy to spread
paranoia, and it's no basis for living a life and especially it's no way to
decide moral or criminal issues. I could go on a murderous rampage tomorrow
(perhaps not physically possible as determined by the laws of physics making
up my brain but "possible" in the looser sense of it being a member of the
state-space of world-configurations). Why don't people I know think this is
likely? Largely due to trust that I've built up. Someone once asked me what
they could do to gain my trust back when they broke it, I said that it's
largely a matter of not doing certain things for a long enough period of time.

And so the problem is heavily dependent on what Google, Facebook, et al. end
up _actually_ doing with the data. What they could or might do has little
relevance, what they're likely to do has significant relevance but still not
as much as what they actually do. Thus far, they've been awesome about either
not doing evil things with it or at least not letting me know about their
evildoings. Their trust is not yet broken with me, unlike with some other
companies I can think of (and correspondingly don't deal with at all).

Therefore I continue to use their products and let them collect and infer as
they please. I don't exactly make this easy for them either since I too have
"unusual" browsing habits in the form of NoScript, AdBlock, multiple browsers,
shared, dynamic IPs and occasionally Tor. I didn't even join Facebook until a
couple months ago on a "Let's see who friends me" curiosity (so I don't friend
anyone myself). I'm sure there are plenty of Evercookies on my system I'm
unaware of though and my full Firefox UserAgent is pretty unique. So they
likely have a decent profile of me that they just don't reveal in a
straightforward manner. They could also form a good picture from my comments
here and elsewhere. (I don't think they have much ad preference data on me
except perhaps that I hate ads.)

Though that brings me again to the issue that it can be worth speculating over
what is likely to happen that will cause the trust to be broken and if I
should be avoiding certain classes of actions that typically lead to harsh
repercussions later. For example, suppose you have data showing it's quite
likely that lending large sums of money to friends leads to the destruction of
the friendship sometime later. Maybe your friendship will be different, but if
that outcome is quite likely, you'd probably be better off not taking the risk
and in this case acting on facts apart from what the other person has actually
done is useful.

Even if these companies break their trust with me in the future, the most
likely ways it will be broken do not seem to have incredibly unfortunate
outcomes for me. (I can of course think of other quite nasty outcomes as well
as anyone.) Similar to how, for example, a friend stealing something petty
from you doesn't often cause great financial loss or inconvenience but the
trust is shattered nevertheless. Or there may even be actions taken that I
never signed up for or wanted and probably would have said "This will violate
my trust if they do this" had 'this' been told to me before they did it, yet
those actions actually end up being very useful to me and so it doesn't break
my trust. I think this is actually how a lot of technological progress has
been for a lot of people. They're taken on the ride from the status quo
whether they like it or not, but in the aftermath they often like the new
place better.

~~~
tjoff
You admit that there is a risk, but what can you gain from taking that risk?
Because without gain, what incentive to you have to take the risk? Yes, I
agree that the likely outcome isn't that bad if they break my trust but only
tracking my search queries would be quite revealing and sensitive and would
reveal stuff that I tell very few people. So, the thing that yahoo did
(releasing all queries with an "anonymous" user ID) could have had huge
implications for me personally.

In terms of friendship etc. the gains are huge, but what about google?

Relevant ads? I have never, ever, in my life clicked on a google ad on purpose
(probably a few by mistake (thus I immediately left the page)). And that
despite that they are "relevant", so... What can I gain from letting google
collect all that information about me?

And honestly I believe you get much better ads by targeting a site rather than
a person. The best ads and the only ads I've ever positively responded to are
those from a local tech site (the same ads but on a food site would probably
not interest me as much).

~~~
Permit
The gain in offering up data to Google is free use of a number of services I
find useful. Gmail, Google Docs, Google Chrome, Google Search and YouTube are
just a handful of the services I enjoy using free of charge. In exchange, I
have little to no problem with Google tracking my behavior to target
advertisements at me.

~~~
jfoster
Plus you can continue to use those services and opt out of Google tracking
that stuff or use incognito mode in your browser. Not that you'd want to. Like
me, you probably prefer seeing advertising that you're more likely to be
interested in.

------
fingerprinter
Check my name. I KNOW companies know more about this person than he thinks.
How do I know this? Because, once, a long time ago, I wrote browser
fingerprinting software for a security company that then spun it to be used
for nefarious purposes (I say nefarious, but really, it is nothing more than
what Google and FB do today). That was when I left.

The point being, it is really, REALLY, hard for someone to be invisible while
browsing the modern internet. There are very few things you can do, but there
are some things.

1\. Install adblock 2\. browse incognito 3\. browse through a proxy (creates
noise) and, the most important 4\. use a plugin that randomizes queries to its
components.

For #4, I don't know of any out there that do this effectively so I wrote my
own.

The big take away from the article is that "nothing is stored locally"...well,
most companies haven't been tracking that way for a long, long time.

~~~
buro9
I agree. I wrote a security layer for a sports video site to detect shared
passwords by creating fingerprints of clients using every signal I could get
hold of.

However, the point of the article isn't "do not track", it's "consume without
personalisation".

------
Katelyn
You are right. I don't browse like you do. That would take forever.

I wonder: Are you afraid Google is sitting at home drooling over the fact that
you bought your shoes from JcPenny?

You’re not a name, you’re not a face, you’re a knode. a cookie. literally, a
number in trillions of records.

Secondly, you sit on the web writing openly about privacy issues, while
overtly displaying your information on those "Identity tracking" services you
use, like Facebook, which If you spent the same amount of time you spend
writing about how Google is out to get you, perhaps would understand that
while you're browsing incognito, Google is having a frenzy with your gmail
content, building a profile on you that you may never see.

At the end of the day, someone is always going to be collecting information on
you, and your information will be again, one dot tied to your one number-
among trillions of other records. There will always be internet ads.

To wrap this up, my point is that if you really don’t wan’t to be tracked,
then cancel your credit card, pay everything in cash, disable your GPS, avoid
connecting via Wi-Fi, forget doing ‘good deeds’ like filling out surveys, or
giving your name and number to a blood drive. Oh and completely disconnect
your router.

~~~
buro9
I replied to you on the blog but since you cross-posted:

@Katelyn, I think you misunderstand the purpose.

It’s not a paranoia thing to prevent companies recording information, instead
it’s a preference for how I like to consume the web. The companies are free to
record whatever they wish, they do so by my user of their service. But I’m
free to choose how my client consumes their service.

I just prefer web sites that aren’t updating state based on me just reading
things.

I like to see opposing sides of the argument, so don’t like the idea of being
bubbled by my own preferences.

I feel a little freaked out when one cycling site I go on has adverts for the
tyres I looked at 2 weeks ago on an entirely unconnected web site.

Personalisation can get it wrong. In the same way that Amazon recommendations
become tainted every December when you do the Christmas shop.

And personalisation can be _extremely_ upsetting, such as a family member who
still receives new born baby information months after a miscarriage.

It just comes back to how I use the web.

I enjoy it more when it’s made up of many disconnected things giving a
consistent experience to the user... me.

~~~
Katelyn
It wasn't clear to me that you were trying to avoid "the filter bubble." It
sounded as though you were truly paranoid/freaked out when you saw advertisers
retargeting you, etc.

I din't realize inaccurate personalization could be so upsetting. I typically
take everything I read or see with a grain of salt. The Internet, afterall, is
made by bozos like you and me ;)

------
fdb
On Firefox, I use the RequestPolicy plugin: by default, it only allows
requests to the current domain, so nytimes.com can't access
connect.facebook.com. You can enable requests to go through, so that
reddit.com can access redditstatic.com.

I think it strikes a good balance between blocking _everything_ (a la
NoScript) and total openness.

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
US/firefox/addon/requestpolicy...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
US/firefox/addon/requestpolicy/)

~~~
jerf
"blocking _everything_ (a la NoScript)"

This seems to be a really popular misconception (presumably the name), but
NoScript works pretty much as you describe, too.

You do not need a plugin to turn "everything" off, the browsers all ship with
that capability and have for over 15 years.

------
wickedchicken
The author can use separate chrome profiles for each logged in service. This
way you can stay logged in while isolating your tracking to that tab.

~~~
buddydvd
Your comment should be on top. Everything OP said can easily be done with
Chrome's multiple profile feature. I love the fact that I can run _multiple_
incognito sessions at the same time without it being bounded by the number of
browsers you have. Multiple Gmail sessions? No problem. You can just setup a
profile for each email account you own without requiring you to sign-in every
time.

------
steve8918
I browse pretty much like this as well. I log into incognito mode for Facebook
and Gmail, and everything else in regular mode.

Incidentally, I also have about 50 separate email accounts that I use to log
into various services. This helped me greatly when my Stratfor and my ps3
accounts were compromised, I didn't have to worry that a particularly
important email address was at risk, so I just ditched them.

------
Terretta
Have to mention Ghostery: <http://www.ghostery.com/download>

"Ghostery allows you to detect trackers on the sites you visit, learn more
about the companies behind them, and control their visibility into your online
behavior."

Works in most browsers.

~~~
Toucan
Having already installed that I was mildly amused to find Google Analytics on
the blog.

------
there
I use Firefox's default cookie policy of "Keep until I close Firefox", which
makes it behave like Incognito mode, but also the Cookie Monster plugin[1]
which lets me easily whitelist sites or domains with a click to allow their
cookies to persist. This is useful for sites like Hacker News so I don't have
to login every time, and my bank which requires long-lasting cookies to avoid
having to jump through hoops with security questions.

I also use the Ghostery plugin which blocks a bunch of ad networks so they
won't place cookies at all, but even if they do, they'll be reset when I close
the browser due to the cookie policy.

1\. [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-
monste...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-
monster/?src=search)

------
cypherpunks01
I use Chrome's Vanilla Cookie Manager extension to continually throw out ALL
cookies older than 30 minutes, except for the following which are saved over
browsing sessions: (star).google.com, (star).workflowy.com,
news.ycombinator.com

It works really well, and I don't have to go through the hassle of using two
browsers. Additionally not accepting 3rd party cookies and using
<http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/> for ads. Not quite as secure as OP, but
mostly does the job.

[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/gieohaicffldbmiilo...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/gieohaicffldbmiilohhggbidhephnjj)

------
joedev
Everyone who think's David's post was about privacy and information security
didn't read it very closely. He said at multiple times that the purpose is
because he wants to keep out of "personalized bubbles", wants to have a
broader view of web content and to avoid sites changing "some state because it
knew who I was".

It has nothing to do with what will happen to his browsing habit information
or with dislike of being tracked.

~~~
RandallBrown
it seems like a lot of effort to go through just for the off chance that an ad
will show you something unexpectedly interesting. It seems like Reddit or
Pinterest or even your Facebook friends would be better for that kind of
stuff.

------
eiji
There is one IE9 feature that I miss in Chrome or Firefox:

"Preserve Favorites website data" under Delete Browsing History.

With that I can delete all cookies after a session but my logins stay active.
And I don't need an extension for it. Every browser should support that. And
the OS integration of IE9 on windows 7 is superior to the competition.

------
ghc
This reminds me of the old days where people would encrypt all their emails,
no matter how mundane, with blowfish. I'm pretty sure there must be some sort
of inverse relationship between the effort you put in to hiding your comms
activity and the amount of stuff you actually need to hide.

~~~
DanBC
That type of encryption was more about preventing governments from reading all
your communication. There was talk about ECHELON and similar data-traffic-
trawling systems.

The "risk" to the average person from those systems was very low. (Ignoring,
for a moment, the jobs lost to industrial espionage.)

But we know that gathering huge data-sets is important to many companies.
Sometimes those companies are lawful (Google or Facebook) but sometimes they
are unlawful (Russian criminal gangs). And even if they're lawful companies
they may be using the data in bad ways, or not keeping the data secure.

It is amazing to see what people give up in return for "free" smileys or
animated cursors or a shitty facebook game.

~~~
ghc
I completely agree with you, but it matters what type of data we're talking
about here. Facebook scared me off a long time ago with its policies and what
it knew about me, but it's a different story with Google's personalized
search. I don't worry about a company knowing my browsing habits. I worry
about a company losing my credit card info or leaking my SSN or deleting my
emails. Compared to those things, preventing Google from guessing my
demographic via search analysis is pretty much meaningless.

------
zalew
_Your categories and demographics No interest or demographic categories are
associated with your ads preferences so far. You can add or edit interests and
demographics at any time._

I don't browse incognito and I'm always logged in to google.

------
GnarlinBrando
Google has no interests or demographics for me and I do not go nearly as far
as this article suggests. I use adblock, wallflower, and antisocial
extensions, as well as the do not track feature of firefox. But I am
constantly signed in to gmail, frequently in amazon, and other places. Use
firefox for all my browsing and don't really worry about it. If anyone wants
to get information on me I am sure there are many more ways to get it than
google anyway. While I like my privacy I have to accept that in this day and
age it is relatively easy to find information about someone.

------
frudi
Well, I tried opening the link mentioned in the article, but Opera told me
it's blocked by the Content Blocker. So I temporarily removed the _/ads/_
filter and tried to open the link again. Got forwarded to a different url and
now Opera tells me this one is also blocked. So I disabled Opera's AdBlock
extension and tried to open the link again. This time, Google tells me that
Ads Preferences requires enabled cookies. So at that point I gave up and re-
enabled AdBlock.

------
valuegram
I've found that there are times that some of those "features" can make
browsing slightly more efficient. Cookies, cache, history, etc. have all come
in handy at times. I have my chrome setup with the standard privacy settings,
and then have my FireFox setup in full blown stealth mode. ...I then choose
which browser I use based on whether I'm looking for speed and efficiency or
anonymity and security.

------
clone1018
I don't browse like this at all, I really couldn't give two shits on if Google
knows I like "Computers & Electronics - Programming".

------
ClintonWu
If you don't browse like this, checkout Skim.Me (<http://skim.me>) to follow
your browsing routine from one clean feed. We automatically load your sources
and adjust the feed based on various data you allow us to access. All in the
name of trying to save you time. If you do browse like this, then we're not
for you.

~~~
Donald
Considering the nature of your product, I'm immediately concerned about the
lack of an available privacy policy on your landing page.

------
gumbo72
So, he hates Google knowing what he likes, but he doesn't mind that they have
his phone #?

~~~
buro9
Google know exactly what I like, I'm sat in Gmail all day and have G+ open.
And I own domains, everyone already has my name, email, number and address.

What I disliked were:

* Websites automatically changing state based on a cookie (forums that reset what it believes you've read)

* To be on site B and have what I viewed on site A appear (adverts over-personalising kept creeping me out thinking there was a relationship between disconnected sites)

* My searches being personalised (in the same way that Amazon recommended gets skewed by Christmas shopping, so my searches get skewed when my girl says "Can you just look this up for me", I also want to see other opinions so don't want opposing views filtered out)

But I didn't dislike those things enough to do anything about them. They're
just small papercuts.

This browsing style evolved from using incognito and private browsing to
assist web development, I continue to use it because it prevents all of the
papercuts above.

------
dennisgorelik
"I use Last Pass to login to sites, it only takes a split second"

Most likely every login is taxing him by 10 seconds or more (not split second)
+ interrupts his train of thought.

He gains almost nothing in return.

------
tete
Google tells me I don't have a cookie, which is a bit strange because I allow
cookies. Anyway, looks like Google knows nothing about me either.

I know a lot of things that could cause this, even tough I tried a few things
it's hard to figure out why Google isn't profiling me.

Is it maybe the DNT header, any of the disabled Javascript or the EasyPricacy
list of APB? Maybe Spybot blocks something. Is there a way to opt-out for
this? Maybe I never opted in? Anyone got an idea?

------
spydum
i suspect quite a few people do browse this way.. i do much of the same things
(minus last pass, i still use keepass copy/paste).

------
Pent
I had nothing listed under the demographics, which baffles me because I use
chrome, always logged in search, gmail, g+, picasa, etc Very quite odd that
they don't profile me. With that said, I obviously do not care if they know
all this information about me. So the article is true in this case as I do not
browse that way (too inconvenient)

------
caller9
Actually I browse a lot like this. So there.

~~~
ff0066mote
Me too.

.bashrc:

    
    
      alias cookies="/usr/bin/chromium --user-data-dir=$HOME/.chromium/cookies"
      alias nocookies="/usr/bin/chromium --user-data-dir=$HOME/.chromium/nocookies --incognito"
      alias chromium='echo "cookies or nocookies?"'

------
EGreg
You are right. As a developer, I would browse something like this:

1) Chrome incognito windows to test what people see before they sign into a
service.

2) If I like the service, I would switch over to a normal Chrome window to see
what a "typical" person would see.

3) If I want another identity I open another browser.

------
kylebrown
And what kind of ads does google show to someone who it knows nothing about?
Do all those ads I see for "work from home for $5k/month", "get ripped" and
[screenshot of a social networking thumbnail of random girl] say more about
_me_ or everybody else?

------
hmottestad
I've disabled 3rd party cookies and opted out of web history. So it has
nothing to show.

~~~
mangodrunk
Great, now you have perhaps a slightly less pleasing experience at the risk of
nothing.

------
stfu
<http://panopticlick.eff.org/>

Besides all proxies, adblocks and incognito modes the world is still scary out
there. No matter how hard I try, I always get a "your configuration is unique"
message.

------
rgrieselhuber
They have your IP addrress(es). It's trivial for them to put together a
profile on you.

------
sarnowski
Instead of installing 10 plugins, it may also be valid to use a browser who
just has privacy as a main concern like <http://openports.se/www/xxxterm>

------
therandomguy
Why? Just to avoid relevant targeted ads?

------
RobertKohr
So he has no problem to the government having a back door to read all of his
email on gmail.

~~~
CWIZO
Would you care to elaborate on this? What back door?

