<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>autoexec</author><text>&amp;gt; Regarding analytics, I believe browsers should take user&amp;#x27;s side and do not cooperate with marketing companies&lt;p&gt;Browsers were supposed to act as agents working for the user. User-agents. These days it&amp;#x27;s getting harder and harder to find a browser that doesn&amp;#x27;t work for an ad company at the expense of the user.&lt;p&gt;Chrome&amp;#x27;s entire reason for existing is data collection. Firefox can, for now at least, be hardened to work for the user (and prevent a lot of fingerprinting), but Mozilla is an ad-tech company too now. They&amp;#x27;ve made their lack of respect for Firefox users clear by making Firefox spy on users by default so that Mozilla can sell that data to marketers.&lt;p&gt;Currently, you can disable that spying in about:config by setting dom.private-attribution.submission.enabled to false
(see &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=41311479&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=41311479&lt;/a&gt; and also &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;web.archive.org&amp;#x2F;web&amp;#x2F;20240827185708&amp;#x2F;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;make-firefox-private-again.com&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;web.archive.org&amp;#x2F;web&amp;#x2F;20240827185708&amp;#x2F;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;make-fire...&lt;/a&gt;). No idea how long that will continue to be an option or how often you&amp;#x27;ll have to go back and reset that back to false following updates though.&lt;p&gt;We really need a new browser that actually works in the interest of the users.</text><parent_chain><item><author>codedokode</author><text>Have been using Firefox for a long time, no issues, though long ago when I had little memory, Chrome was using less of it. Firefox also has HTTPS-only mode, encrypted DNS without fallbacks, supports SOCKS and Encrypted Client Hello (although almost no website support it). However, it is better to just buy more memory (unless you are lucky to use Apple products).&lt;p&gt;Regarding analytics, I believe browsers should take user&amp;#x27;s side and do not cooperate with marketing companies; even better, they should implement measures to make user tracking and fingerprinting more difficult. There is no need to track user&amp;#x27;s browsing history; just make a product better than competitors (so that it gets first place in reviews and comparisons) and buy ads from influencers.&lt;p&gt;It would be great if browsers made fingerprinting more difficult, i.e.: not allowed to read canvas data, not allowed to read GPU name, enumerate audio cards, probe for installed extensions etc. Every new web API should guarantee that it doesn&amp;#x27;t provide more fingerprinting data or hides the data behind a permission.&lt;p&gt;Regarding 3rd party cookies: instead of shady lists like RWS browsers should just add a button that allows 3rd party cookies as an exception on a legacy website relying on them (which is probably not very secure). Although, there is a risk that newspaper websites, blog websites and question-answers websites will force users to press the button to see the content.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users</title><url>https://brave.com/blog/related-website-sets/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>lcnPylGDnU4H9OF</author><text>&amp;gt; Every new web API should guarantee that it doesn&amp;#x27;t provide more fingerprinting data or hides the data behind a permission.&lt;p&gt;FWIW, it&amp;#x27;s practically impossible to provide that guarantee because the API necessarily provides at least the data point of, &amp;quot;Did they select an option in the permission notification?&amp;quot; (&amp;quot;If yes, what option was selected?&amp;quot; etc.)&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s often said that the only solution to this is regulation and there seems to be a good case for that perspective.</text><parent_chain><item><author>codedokode</author><text>Have been using Firefox for a long time, no issues, though long ago when I had little memory, Chrome was using less of it. Firefox also has HTTPS-only mode, encrypted DNS without fallbacks, supports SOCKS and Encrypted Client Hello (although almost no website support it). However, it is better to just buy more memory (unless you are lucky to use Apple products).&lt;p&gt;Regarding analytics, I believe browsers should take user&amp;#x27;s side and do not cooperate with marketing companies; even better, they should implement measures to make user tracking and fingerprinting more difficult. There is no need to track user&amp;#x27;s browsing history; just make a product better than competitors (so that it gets first place in reviews and comparisons) and buy ads from influencers.&lt;p&gt;It would be great if browsers made fingerprinting more difficult, i.e.: not allowed to read canvas data, not allowed to read GPU name, enumerate audio cards, probe for installed extensions etc. Every new web API should guarantee that it doesn&amp;#x27;t provide more fingerprinting data or hides the data behind a permission.&lt;p&gt;Regarding 3rd party cookies: instead of shady lists like RWS browsers should just add a button that allows 3rd party cookies as an exception on a legacy website relying on them (which is probably not very secure). Although, there is a risk that newspaper websites, blog websites and question-answers websites will force users to press the button to see the content.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users</title><url>https://brave.com/blog/related-website-sets/</url></story>