Could forum.dlang.org remember how many captchas I filled out?

[Joakim via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 25 May 2016 at 21:52:40 UTC, cy wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 May 2016 at 20:24:50 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> It's run by the company behind Wordpress, which has less than 
>> 500 employees.
>
> Okay fine, maybe it's not Proctor and Gamble. But do you want 
> to face up against 500 people and tell them to stop doing what 
> they want?

If they're part of a company that's trying to put out a good 
service that will help you rather than hinder you, yes.

>> Maybe they could sort out why this is hitting you so hard, 
>> when it doesn't affect others as much.
>
> It's probably because I'm running a relay program that helps 
> people with their privacy. I'm not an exit relay or anything, 
> but it's a good business model for tracking companies like 
> those guys to put pressure on people who run those programs 
> even passively, so that they can keep me from helping others 
> have any privacy.

I doubt they're against Tor or whatever relay you're using, but 
it may be the cause.

>> If you don't want to be profiled, you shouldn't use the web, 
>> as it's not hard to track you:
>
> The greatest achievement of any thief is to convince you it's 
> pointless to try and stop them from stealing. Because then you 
> try to convince others, and in doing so you help weaken the 
> people trying to help you, and your own attackers gain more 
> support.
>
> So uh, don't ever tell anyone there's no point in trying to be 
> safe. Even if you feel like it's true. If it is true, then 
> there's no point in you telling anyone, right?

I wouldn't call it stealing, more like casing, ;) but yes, it is 
impossible to stop that without going to extreme measures, no 
matter how much you'd like it to be otherwise.  I appreciate that 
some will go to extreme measures, and it's good that those 
options are there for them, but it doesn't sound like you 
yourself are doing so.

>> https://panopticlick.eff.org
>
> Yeah, that one has never managed to get me. Use a generic user 
> agent, disallow javascript, and disable cookies, and the amount 
> of certainty they can get goes down a whole lot. What you 
> really have to worry about is who ISPs are in cahoots with, 
> because ISPs can track a lot of people with 100% legal 
> certainty, without their permission or awareness. The EFF thing 
> is a minor, paltry concern compared to that.

Disabling javascript will help a lot, but the number of sites you 
can use goes way down with it.  Of course, as you say, ISP 
tracking data can always be sold too.

> Another thing to worry about is when people communicate using 
> big, powerful centralized companies, like Google or Facebook. 
> Organizations that have money and popularity can put pressure 
> on people like me then, spending countless man hours developing 
> tactics to prevent me from communicating with people, unless I 
> allow their tracking software to run.

Yeah, I don't use any of those; I was talking about tracking and 
fingerprinting that goes on outside those central services.

> But Panopticlick is just an idle curiosity, security-wise.

When they first put that site up, I was surprised how easy it was 
for them to fingerprint your browser even with cookies disabled, 
just by using all the identifying info your browser sends.  With 
all the tracking ads and pixels embedded in practically every 
website these days, it's not hard for them to track you and I've 
seen advertiser presentations on how they're actively doing so.  
It's the price of a "free" web.