DanielVarga comments on Isn't this sitemeter logging a bit too excessive? - Less Wrong

20 Post author: DanielVarga 02 February 2011 08:55PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (19)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DanielVarga 03 February 2011 09:54:30AM 0 points [-]

What is this supposed to prove? It took me one minute to identify myself, without checking my IP address.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 03 February 2011 10:10:00AM 0 points [-]

It's not supposed to prove anything, it's just observing that identifying individuals using this information isn't a completely trivial task.

Comment author: DanielVarga 03 February 2011 11:13:49AM 1 point [-]

It is not always completely trivial to identify individual visitors? That is a very low standard.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 03 February 2011 12:52:07PM 0 points [-]

I don't describe it as "not completely trivial" because I think it's some sort of laudable standard, but because you are implying that it is a completely trivial task.

Using information which in all likelihood is known to no-one else on this site but you, you've found a reliable method of uniquely identifying yourself. If you hadn't published it, the amount of effort required to identify you would probably be enough of an obstacle to deter anyone with a sudden hankering to investigate your recent LW browsing history from doing so.

My original comment was observing that I'm me, I know (and probably care) more about me than anyone else in the world, including specific technical information salient for tracking myself in a web activity logging context, and it was still far from immediately apparent as to who I was. If someone else knew (or cared) enough about me to try and do the same, they'd probably have better methods available to them.

Comment author: DanielVarga 04 February 2011 01:53:57AM 0 points [-]

I don't describe it as "not completely trivial" because I think it's some sort of laudable standard, but because you are implying that it is a completely trivial task.

It seem like our difference is about whether to give a worst-case security analysis or a best-case security analysis. :) It is a completely trivial task for a high percentage of potential targets. Some people aren't geolocated or are incorrectly geolocated. Some live in large cities. But a long tail of lesswrong users is almost completely identified by their geolocation.

Using information which in all likelihood is known to no-one else on this site but you, you've found a reliable method of uniquely identifying yourself.

No. The only information I used was that I am from Hungary. Nothing else. This fact about me is public here. (Obviously, nobody cares about it, but that does not make it a secret. Again, I am talking about worst-case analysis.)

I am really not monomaniac about privacy. I agree with you that it is not a big deal that somebody can be followed like that. But at least let's realize that lesswrong is unusual in this regard, and unusual in a bad way.