'ClickClickClick' Site Reveals How Much Browsers Know About Your Online Behavior (news.com.au) 74
mi writes: The site called ClickClickClick annotates your every move on its one and only page. Turn on the sound to listen to verbal annotations in addition to reading them. The same is possible for, and therefore done by, the regular sites as they attempt to study visitors looking for various trends -- better to gauge our opinions and sell us things. While not a surprise to regular Slashdotters, it is certainly a good illustration... Dutch media company VPRO and Amsterdam based interactive design company Studio Moniker have created the site to remind online users about the "serious themes of big data and privacy." Studio Monkier designer Roel Wouters said, "It seemed fun to thematize this in a simple and lighthearted way."
Not working. (Score:1)
Since I block all this crap, all I get is error messages.
Re: (Score:1)
Using NoScript, I only allow javascript when the benefits to me outweigh the cost by some, considerable margin.
NoScript? (Score:1)
Better even: go into about:config and gut as much javascript functionality as possible. That's my default profile.
For pages that insist on javascript (and which I have to use: not many, perhaps once, twice a month) I use a throwaway profile.
I trust my browser... only a bit. I'd prefer a proxy (independent from my browser) to do the gutting, something akin to Privoxy. Some day I'll be there (this proxy could, e.g. instead of dropping cookies and single-pixel-parasites, just send some phantasy values (or even
Re: (Score:2)
Using NoScript, I only allow javascript when the benefits to me outweigh the cost by some, considerable margin.
Bingo.
Between Adblock and Noscript I almost never get to "enjoy" any of this wonderful "please spy on me" functionality.
Empty page (Score:2)
just like my post :P
Yeah so??? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Whoosh!
Re:Yeah so??? (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I was disappointed. I expected an Orwellian experience where it told me what my sexual orientation was and who I vote for all I got was a load of crap I'd expect any piece of software to be capable of monitoring. I mean honestly slashdot clickbait much?
My point exactly. It rather trivializes the "serious themes of big data and privacy", rather than "thematize this in a simple and lighthearted way".
Re: (Score:1)
This proof-of-concept experiment analyzes the domains in your browsing history to show your overall browsing interests based on ODP categories and Alexa siteinfo. All the analysis is done with your local Firefox data and nothing is sent out of Firefox.
Entertaining at best... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "classical" web experience was that the user was always, and easily, aware that there wasn't "the" machine, but two machines: the browser and the server. And you were only interacting with someone else's computer who serves their interests over yours, when you request a page, submit a form, etc.
Web 2.0 is that the browser runs javascript and therefore your own computer is their agent, using your electricity and hardware on their beha
Re: (Score:2)
Row row, fight the power.
Didn't reveal much (Score:5, Informative)
It didn't reveal much? Guessed the number of CPU cores wrong (says four, I've got two but perhaps it counts hyperthreading?). Using Firefox with an adblocker, on a Mac.
It could've done OS and browser fingerprinting, show possible location based on IP, shown a number of social networks that I usually log into, etc.
Somewhat disappointed actually :) Or perhaps relieved :)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, it didn't seem to find very much for me either - no adblocker as such, but I have the hidden tracking protection option enabled (which I can strongly recommend). It identified Firefox, though took a few minutes before this happened, but didn't seem to know the OS (which surprised me given it's in the user agent string). It was very confused about window size: small movements around the button would be treated as if I'd moved to the far corners of the window, and opening Firebug within the window was i
Re: (Score:2)
Software non-freedom should make you feel unsafe. (Score:2)
It's good you're using free software, and you should use more of it (preferring a free software OS and a computer that runs nothing but a free OS with free software on top of it). But you shouldn't feel relieved. Just because your browser got things wrong in this test doesn't mean your proprietary (therefore untrustworthy-by-default) OS will fail too. People visit these sites and erroneously think they're safer using a proprietary OS to run their free software browser (or worse, they endorse a proprietary b
Re: (Score:2)
JavaScript and NOT scientifically proven results - perfect combo for dodo marketers!
Thanks God (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Let Google do the same (Score:5, Funny)
Let Google do the same :
* Your credit card number is 5500 4567 3436 7804
* You spent $3754.17 on Amazon in 2016
* Your coordinates are 39.2904 N, 76.6122 W
* Your dad has undiagnosed cancer since may 2016.
* Your wife cheated on you yesterday. Twice! At 39.166537, -76.624614 and 39.204198, -76.655321, with Google users #5465487874 and #497987544
Have a nice day, and remember : "don't be evil"!
Re:Let Google do the same (Score:5, Funny)
Reminds me of this joke [cc.com].
Re: (Score:1)
Brilliant (Score:2)
"Looking at subjects timezone, he probably should be at work!"
:-)
Not much shown,.. (Score:1)
All I get is a white page with a link:
https://www.google-analytics.c... [google-analytics.com]
I mean who really runs javascript from unknown sites?
Re:Not much shown,.. (Score:5, Informative)
who really runs javascript from unknown sites?
Roughly 99% of internet users [blog.gov.uk]. About 0.2% deliberately disable javascript. That data is from 2013. A quick search didn't bring up anything more recent, but I doubt there's been a humongous sway in javascript use among the general populace. Keep in mind that Slashdot users such as us are, almost by definition, not representative of the average internet user; just because it's common amongst your circle to disable javascript by default, doesn't mean that's common for everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean who really runs javascript from unknown sites?
Everyone who wants the internet to work without babying it. So pretty much everyone. Heck for most people administering an adblocker is too much effort.
Unimpressed (Score:2)
Color me unimpressed. It tells me I moved my mouse on its page. It tells me when I click on its page. I would surely hope a web page gets those events. It does not seem to tell the user about all the fingerprinting information it can get, or much about cookies, beyond the fact that it sets one.
Embarrassing: it actually gets some things wrong, like the saying that I moved the mouse to the upper left (when I did not).
The idea is good, but the implementation seems to be pretty limited...
Re: (Score:2)
Keep using it. It comes up with more information the longer you use it. The events can be somewhat delayed, sure, but it does more than you seem to think it does...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
ClickClickClickBait
terrible media website (Score:1)
no comment on the DNS query nor on the route
basically this site is new media, it gathers data but uses a pre recorded voice to describe it i.e. it uses predefined comments about a users state....
it's a bit like the Huxley comment on society... it may be valid but really its recycled can we please have a new comment ?
thanks this is the internet its a little different (not huge but a little)
John Jones
More troubling than I expected (Score:2, Funny)
Hey, how did it find out about the body? Hmm, I'd better cover my traces.
uMatrix FTW! (Score:3)
All I get is a blank white page with a little spinning cursor.
Yet another reason why i love uMatrix