Clean up the web!
46

Developers, it’s time for you to choose a side: will you help rid the web of privacy-invading tracking or be complicit in it?

https://cleanuptheweb.org/

#CleanUpTheWeb #FlocOffGoogle

@nutomic
admin
link
183M

I’m not sure that this initiative makes much sense. The vast majority of developers work in private companies, and dont have any say in the tracking and advertising thats embedded in their sites. Those decisions are taken by managers, and managers care about profits, not what some cute little website says.

So most likely this initiative wont have any effect at all, other than being shared around in privacy circles. If we really want to challenge the tracking/advertising model for websites, I see two options. Either we do something so websites are discouraged from using advertising. As companies generally dont care about ethics, this would have to be an economic incentive. Basically, advertising would disappear very fast if websites earn more money without ads than with. But this seems impossible to achieve, except in isolated cases.

The other option is that we build alternative websites, which do not rely on for-profit companies. This is what the fediverse does, and open source projects in general. I think this is clearly the moat promising approach, and we should focus our efforts in this direction.

Helix
link
5
edit-2
3M

Would be nice if the site was actually useful, like telling me what to put in my nginx server config to add the header:

server {
  …
  add_header Permissions-Policy "interest-cohort=()";
  …
}
@j0ta
creator
banned
link
1
edit-2
3M

To opt your site out of FLoC, you need to send the Permissions Policy HTTP response header.

Permissions Policy is a new header that allows a site to control which features and APIs can be used in the browser. To opt-out, use this header:

Permissions-Policy: interest-cohort=()

If you have access to the .htaccess file on your Apache server, you can edit it with this code to set your Permissions Policy:

<IfModule mod_headers.c> Header always set Permissions-Policy: interest-cohort=() </IfModule>>

@Echedenyan
link
53M

Why not just dis-recommend the use of Goolag Chrome in the websites?

@j0ta
creator
banned
link
33M

We’ve been for years warning people but they are kinda addicted that chrome is the best, we know that’s full lie.

Devs can make their part to help the #OpenWeb and not all-in with google shit policy of we want to track your site visitors everywere

Helix
link
23M

we know that’s full lie.

well then, make a list of arguments people actually care about. Because if you only want to browse the web as a noob, you could use any browser which can do JS and follows most of the standards. It doesn’t matter for Joane Normal if they use Chrome, Firefox, Vivaldi, Edgeium, Konqueror or whatever.

@j0ta
creator
banned
link
53M

This is the info you give google just by using chrome

@federico3
link
33M

Source please? :)

@j0ta
creator
banned
link
13M

Apple store

@j0ta
creator
banned
link
43M

Downvoters expose your side in comments instead downvote

Bilb!
link
33M

I did not downvote and I do like the sentiment, but reading it makes me feel so tired. I don’t think sympathetic developers like me will ever turn the tide. I would love to be wrong.

@j0ta
creator
banned
link
2
edit-2
3M

It’s only add an header to implement it and google analytics facebook like button etc etc clearly don’t need to be on your website

Tell Google to FLoC off!

Due to mounting pressure, Google announced it will eventually block third-party tracking in its Chrome browser. Sounds good, right? And it is, until you hear that their proposed alternative is to have Chrome itself track people on every site they visit… unless the sites ask them not to by including the following header in their responses:

Permissions-Policy: interest-cohort=()

@Echedenyan
link
23M

Let’s see an Apache Http Server module for it.

@canteen
link
-13M

I downvoted because this read like pointless nerdrage. The only way to completely avoid Google is to turn off the internet. There are many ways to limit Google influence, but those are much better explained on switching.software. Admittedly, there should also be a site urging developers to stop utilizing Google in their projects but such a site shouldn’t read like the blog of an angry 18 year old who just discovered the free software movement.

@jazzfes
link
53M

Being an angry 18 year old may mean that you are becoming an articulate, critical 36 year old, and subsequently even an influential, world enhancing 72 year old.

A single post won’t change the world. Democracy means that you should/need to listen to people with “stupid” ideas. Some are dumb, less will prove influential.

Let people express their ideas and let them grow them. Downvoting doesn’t seem productive in most cases… if you don’t like something, move on.

@cedric
link
33M

There is also a JavaScript trick if you do not have full access to the configuration of the Web server:

https://git.sr.ht/~cedric/website/commit/7abaa80689c02ece8a477f9f18802dea8de590bc

Bilb!
link
33M

Wow, Google is a factory farm for human beings? I had no idea.

Dragon
link
23M

Does anyone have a good analytics alternative recommendation?

@j0ta
creator
banned
link
33M
@j0ta
creator
banned
link
33M
Dragon
link
23M

It would be nice to have one that tells a little more specific geographical info. More than just “United States”

@DePingus
link
03M

The web is Iost cause. You can choose to leave. There are projects out there like Gemini.

Bilb!
link
9
edit-2
3M

Gemini is irrelevant. Nobody will use that except an exclusive club of geeks. It’s a neat little project but stands no chance in solving our problems.

I don’t think independent software develpers are going to solve this problem. I wonder who the intended audience of this website is. Yeah, my blog with at most hundreds of visitors won’t abuse the data of end users, but who cares? The big centralized services will pay no heed. You can’t solve this with software choices, you need to get control of your government and make this shit illegal.

Helix
link
8
edit-2
3M

Back in the 70s and 80s, the Internet was irrelevant. Nobody used it except an exclusive club of geeks. It was a neat little project.

@Echedenyan
link
23M

Gemini protocol is a meme.

@federico3
link
03M

Gemini has a poor design. It does not solve many of the problems of the web and it lacks a lot of required functions.

@avalos
link
2
edit-2
3M

Poor design in which sense? If you mean content presentation, that’s fully dependent on the client implementations, not the server, so you can make content look the way you want.

If what you mean is protocol design, let me tell you that the protocol is very clean, lightweight (except for TLS) and non-extensible by design. It doesn’t intend to solve all of the problems of the Web, in fact, it doesn’t intend to replace the web, they make it very clear on their official gemsite: https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/gemini.circumlunar.space/

@federico3
link
13M

Gemini claims to “Takes user privacy very seriously” and yet it leaks the client and server IP addresses to each other and to network observers by not using any form of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mix_network.

It claims to “Strives for maximum power to weight ratio” and yet does not support caching.

It does not support content-addressed sites in any form: to host a single-page static site the user has to pay for a VPS or buy some SBC, pay for a domain and configure DNS. The “lightweight” aspect is the protocol itself, not the deployment effort.

The protocol is “non-extensible by design” but obviously cannot prevent users from adding higher-level markups in some clients and start adding complexity, exactly what happened for the web.

@avalos
link
03M

Gemini claims to “Takes user privacy very seriously” and yet it leaks the client and server IP addresses to each other and to network observers by not using any form of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mix_network.

A “mix network” would add a lot of complexity and is out-of-scope for Gemini. If you want a Mix network, build it on the transport layer, not the application layer. We’re on the Internet, IPs are required for everything.

It claims to “Strives for maximum power to weight ratio” and yet does not support caching.

For a reason, though. On the Web, caching is used to inject tracking pixels and persist them.

It does not support content-addressed sites in any form: to host a single-page static site the user has to pay for a VPS or buy some SBC, pay for a domain and configure DNS.

Because that’s also out-of-scope for Gemini. If you want fancy P2P content-addressed stuff, you build it on the network layer, not the application layer. You could still serve Gemini over IPFS in theory.

The “lightweight” aspect is the protocol itself, not the deployment effort.

Yes, because Gemini is a protocol, not a software you can deploy.

The protocol is “non-extensible by design” but obviously cannot prevent users from adding higher-level markups in some clients and start adding complexity, exactly what happened for the web.

It can’t prevent using higher-level markups, but the lack of caching and headers makes some stuff harder.

@federico3
link
13M

That’s some poor reasoning.

@avalos
link
03M

Elaborate, please.

@ajz
link
9
edit-2
2d

deleted by creator

@avalos
link
53M

Agree. I hate the downvote culture, it encourages people to simply click a button rather than expressing their opinion.

Subscribe to see more stories about technology on your homepage


  • 0 users online
  • 9 users / day
  • 30 users / week
  • 119 users / month
  • 449 users / 6 months
  • 2976 subscribers
  • 1375 Posts
  • 3415 Comments
  • Modlog