Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In tones that are significantly milder than I feel ...

I did try the link, it did demand that I login. I did not login, and it did not show me the content.

I resent such accusations, and suggest you make sure you are in full possession of facts before you do so.



I get the content even with (or perhaps because of) noscript and ghostery in Firefox. I also get it in Private Mode on IE9.

Then again, I only access my gmail from it's own dedicated VM and noscript prevents GoogleApis and Analytics by default.

Do you think it possible that Google is requiring you to log in because it can identify you via typical tracking mechanisms?


I don't know, and I suspect that the task of tracking down definitively and conclusively exactly what the conditions are when I can and cannot read things would be lengthy and relatively unrewarding.

I have better things to do than play "hunt the foible" on Google.


In my experience, the conditions are pretty much as described.

If Google knows you have an account because of tracking devices, they require you to log in because you are more salable.

If you're anonymous, you're more salable if they just show you the content.

In so far as I recall, originally G+ wouldn't show content without javascript turned on - i.e. the price of content was to allow Google to track you more closely.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: