I have said several times that I am not completely sure. I will see if I can do some better tests. It is something that I noticed when I installed Jerboa, so I asked about it, and people seemed to confirm that there was server side tracking.
Anyway, even if it’s confirmed, unless there is deception involved (which I have no reason to suspect), there’s not much of an “accusation” to be made. I would say, in the event that individual post views really are saved on the server, that Lemmy’s designers made a policy choice that I don’t agree with. I’d call that a description rather than an accusation. I’d try to open a discussion about getting the decision changed. If that didn’t succeed, I’d look for technical workarounds and/or limit my reading on the site.
No prob, and I’ll go a little further, from having seen this kind of thing many times before. Lots of times these info leaks happen because it was technically convenient or somehow useful to do X, without thinking through the privacy implications. Security vulnerabilities happen the same way. People just want to get their thing done with minimum fuss, rather than dithering around weighing complicated tradeoffs. So X is not explicitly a policy decision at all, but instead is a technical decision that turns out to have policy implications.
I’m a security developer so I have to be attuned to this kind of thing, but I miss stuff too, as does everyone. Most of the time nobody is being “bad”. They are just trying to ship product in a complicated environment full of subtle interactions, and it is easy to overlook stuff, especially if you haven’t already spent a lot of time dealing with those same issues.
I have said several times that I am not completely sure. I will see if I can do some better tests. It is something that I noticed when I installed Jerboa, so I asked about it, and people seemed to confirm that there was server side tracking.
Anyway, even if it’s confirmed, unless there is deception involved (which I have no reason to suspect), there’s not much of an “accusation” to be made. I would say, in the event that individual post views really are saved on the server, that Lemmy’s designers made a policy choice that I don’t agree with. I’d call that a description rather than an accusation. I’d try to open a discussion about getting the decision changed. If that didn’t succeed, I’d look for technical workarounds and/or limit my reading on the site.
Thanks for your clarification.
No prob, and I’ll go a little further, from having seen this kind of thing many times before. Lots of times these info leaks happen because it was technically convenient or somehow useful to do X, without thinking through the privacy implications. Security vulnerabilities happen the same way. People just want to get their thing done with minimum fuss, rather than dithering around weighing complicated tradeoffs. So X is not explicitly a policy decision at all, but instead is a technical decision that turns out to have policy implications.
I’m a security developer so I have to be attuned to this kind of thing, but I miss stuff too, as does everyone. Most of the time nobody is being “bad”. They are just trying to ship product in a complicated environment full of subtle interactions, and it is easy to overlook stuff, especially if you haven’t already spent a lot of time dealing with those same issues.