News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Instant.page. Parent comment

Re:Instant.page by slenk on Monday September 14, 2020 @09:31PM (#24477035)
You said it yourself:

> it’s a theoretical minor violation of privacy

Their goal is to protect privacy. It makes sense to me.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Instant.page by perryizgr8 on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @06:49AM (#24479765)
Then why doesn't easylist add google.com and facebook.com to their list? I'm sure G/FB track every single click you do on their pages. Huge privacy violation. Not even theoretical. Block youtube also, they are tracking your viewing habits, how much you watched, where you skipped, etc. Just block all this.

I wish there was a way to easily override individual entries in easylist/ubo.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Instant.page by monadgonad on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @08:17AM (#24491859)
Because those are services that people use and consent to (implicitly at least) violating their privacy. There's a huge difference between YouTube tracking my habits to improve my YouTube experience (as well as for marketing reasons) and a third party tracking them solely for marketing reasons.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Instant.page by perryizgr8 on Wednesday September 16, 2020 @08:43AM (#24492079)
> and a third party tracking them solely for marketing reasons.

But in this case nobody is tracking anything. The author of the tool himself confirmed that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Instant.page by dieulot on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @12:58AM (#24478014)
> theoretical
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Instant.page by choo-t on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @04:18AM (#24478990)
Like everything until it's used.
[ Parent | on HN ]