On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:16, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Michael Mol wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Michael Hampicke <gentoo-u...@hadt.biz> >> wrote: >>>> There is actually a huge amount of information available, giving a high >>>> level of pseudo-uniqueness. There was a web site that showed you how >>>> much it could glean from even an anonymous session, but I can't remember >>>> where is was. Somewhere like the EFF. >>> >>> I guess you mean https://panopticlick.eff.org/ >>> >> >> My results from work: >> >> Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 1,939,102 tested so >> far. >> >> Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that >> conveys at least 20.89 bits of identifying information. >> > > > Funny, I get exactly the same thing except add one to the large number. > I guess you tested before I did. How does one avoid this but still > have sites work? >
Use Stallman's way [1] Seriously, I am not concerned with Google's policy change, it affects absolutely nothing on my online life. I keep using their services cause I find them the best to use, I would change otherwise. Its the same reason I run Windows on my HTPC, and Linux at work and my netbook, efficiency. If you worry too much, you end up insane. [1] http://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html -- Daniel da Veiga
