I use Privoxy, which is frankly more of a pain b/c there's no simple browser tool to toggle on/off when it breaks a site (I have to occasionally turn the proxy off in my Mac network settings).

But you know what? It's worth it. I'm not being tracked all over the web, I'm not being served re-targeted ads, etc. I'll never go back.

Since you're on OSX I would recommend using Privoxy with Little Snitch (which is quite easy to toggle and tweak quickly).

Do you mean control Privoxy with little snitch? I'd be interested in any links about that, I'm not finding any.

No, not directly. That possibility is somewhat intriguing though.

I simply meant Privoxy appears as a single "application" for Little Snitch rules. It also provides fine grained rules for cases where Little Snitch is too blunt, and each can be quickly and independently disabled when necessary.

Honestly, I'd rather you browse my sites, I don't mind if you disable tracking. Supporting you screwing with my scripts is another matter, it's hard enough to build features, support all the browsers and platforms and realistically people like you are less than 1% of my traffic.

I use tracking to make better products and learn about my audience. Nothing about privacy gets in the way of that.

Err, I think that's sort of the authors point...so we all agree.

And look, I have friends/colleagues who do that (NoScript etc.). And it's probably terrible of me, but I can't deny it isn't a bit amusing watching them fight with every second site, and their need to maintain massive whitelists of every site they need to browse.

It's like people who turn off images in their browser. Sure, it's your prerogative, but the web's sort of moved on from the Mosaic days.

It's like people who think cameras steal their soul, or that wifi radiation will give you cancer. As long as it's just them and the don't inconvenience other people, or complain that stuff "doesn't work" for them, it's cool.

If this was an accessibility issue, I could absolutely understand - I myself have a hearing impairment and it's not something you can help, so I get taht. So yes, whether it's making sure it works for colour blind people, or making sure things have captions, I support.

But this isn't a case of some disability a person can't help - this is people having tinfoil hat conspiracies about what Google might do when they find out they browse lolcats, or that they're buying My Little Pony toys.

>> It's like people who think cameras steal their soul, or that wifi radiation will give you cancer.

It's really nothing like those because web tracking is a real phenomenon and we all know its happening. It's absolutely not tinfoil hat territory to object to foreign corporations being given information on everything you do online.

It's up to you to decide if you don't care, or actively think that it's a good thing, but please don't try and dismiss perfectly valid privacy concerns as paranoid or delusional.