8 ms·

As long as you're asked for permission I don't see the problem

by ghuin 5y ago

vorticalbox 5y ago
This is what I was just thinking. It asks for permission just like microphone or location. Both of which you could argue 'allow for surveillance'
- throwawaynew23 5y ago
  Students last year were complaining about Respondus, and it’s privacy invasive nature, now chrome supports features similar to it. In response to this my school allowed teachers to give easier tests to students using Respondus since they could be sure they weren’t cheating and allowed more complicated tests to be made for those refusing to use Respondus. Maybe with this they’ll recommend chrome and allow a medium difficultly test to be provided to those students.
  - detaro 5y ago
    That's... not a good thing.
- josteink 5y ago
  Those permissions have pretty clear use-cases which benefits the user itself and enables things which otherwise wouldn’t be possible. What user-oriented use-cases does this enable which couldn’t have been done otherwise? I really thinks this is apples vs oranges.
  - phnofive 5y ago
    Absolutely - and I think the typical user has long since been conditioned to click 'Yes' without reading.
  - Ajedi32 5y ago
    Usually the W3C spec for new features like this will contain a few paragraphs outlining intended use cases. In this case: > Making these distinctions is important for applications which have the option of delivering notifications across multiple devices, such as a desktop and smartphone. Users may find it frustrating when notifications are delivered to the wrong device or are disruptive. For example, if they switch from a tab containing a messaging application to one for a document they are editing, the messaging application, not being able to observe that the user is still interacting with their device, may assume that they have left to grab a coffee and start delivering notifications to their phone, causing it to buzz distractingly, instead of displaying notifications on their desktop or incrementing a badge count. Source: https://wicg.github.io/idle-detection/#introduction https://wicg.github.io/idle-detection/#introduction
    - cdirkx 5y ago
      > the messaging application, not being able to observe that the user is still interacting with their device, may assume that they have left to grab a coffee and start delivering notifications to their phone, causing it to buzz distractingly, instead of displaying notifications on their desktop or incrementing a badge count. Is any webapp doing this? To me it sounds like multiple steps into the future: - First a webapp has to have the capability to notify just one device, so in this case your browser and not also your phone. I cant think of an app where you dont receive double notifications on web+mobile (or triple with a smartwatch). - The webapp then needs to be smart enough to dynamically select the "most active" device to send the notification to. - The new feature can then be used as a workaround for "incorrectly" classifying your computer as an inactive device, because you are not interacting with the webpage anymore.
    - fsckboy 5y ago
      giving the users explicit control over where their messages are sent is a good idea. being spied on supposedly so the system can decide where to send you messages is a bad idea.
      - Talanes 5y ago
        An opt-in system to allow idle detection is an explicit control. It shouldn't be the only option, but denying that it should be an option at all feels a little infantilizing.
BystanderX 5y ago
Because if there's a facility that grants out-of-browser data to the remote, the remote can deny service unless it is enabled. Unless the feature is designed to fake data and make permission status opaque to the remote, it's a privacy reduction that will happen, the only question is when.
tclancy 5y ago
What situations would you ever want to let a site know this?
- ghuin 5y ago
  Marking you as away on discord/teams
  - superduperuser 5y ago
    Disord's idle/away seems to be working for me in FF.
- x0x0 5y ago
  chat, video conferencing, maybe forums, spotify when it has conflicting play instructions between a browser and a different device
kube-system 5y ago
There's two reasons why I think it's a bad idea, along with a number of other Chrome APIs: 1. Most people aren't engineers and don't understand the privacy implications of this, and these types of metadata collections. Browsers aren't just developer tools, they are made for the general public. 2. I already get spammed by too many permission popups; rarely are they for purposes that benefit the user. It would be interested to see some stats on how many users simply accept these popups to dismiss them without regard for the consequences.
birthdaydog 5y ago
"Sorry! Looks like something went wrong. In order to use our site you'll have to enable idle tracking. This helps us improve our software for customers like you!"
- ghuin 5y ago
  That won't happen as long as Safari doesn't implement the API. For example: notifications
  - iainmerrick 5y ago
    If you’re saying the feature is only OK as long as at least one major browser doesn’t implement it, to prevent it getting traction, I don’t think it’s a good feature.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  Hey, if they want their app to suck, I have alternatives.
sys_64738 5y ago
It’ll find a workaround that causes you to be asked permission constantly so you’ll give in and accept it. Web pages will do anything to manipulate APIs in nefarious utilization.
rambojazz 5y ago
As long as the permission is opt-in.

As long as you're asked for permission I don't see the problem

by ghuin 5y ago

As long as you're asked for permission I don't see the problem

This is what I was just thinking. It asks for permission just like microphone or location. Both of which you could argue 'allow for surveillance'

throwawaynew23 5y ago
Students last year were complaining about Respondus, and it’s privacy invasive nature, now chrome supports features similar to it. In response to this my school allowed teachers to give easier tests to students using Respondus since they could be sure they weren’t cheating and allowed more complicated tests to be made for those refusing to use Respondus. Maybe with this they’ll recommend chrome and allow a medium difficultly test to be provided to those students.
- detaro 5y ago
  That's... not a good thing.
josteink 5y ago
Those permissions have pretty clear use-cases which benefits the user itself and enables things which otherwise wouldn’t be possible. What user-oriented use-cases does this enable which couldn’t have been done otherwise? I really thinks this is apples vs oranges.
- phnofive 5y ago
  Absolutely - and I think the typical user has long since been conditioned to click 'Yes' without reading.
- Ajedi32 5y ago
  Usually the W3C spec for new features like this will contain a few paragraphs outlining intended use cases. In this case: > Making these distinctions is important for applications which have the option of delivering notifications across multiple devices, such as a desktop and smartphone. Users may find it frustrating when notifications are delivered to the wrong device or are disruptive. For example, if they switch from a tab containing a messaging application to one for a document they are editing, the messaging application, not being able to observe that the user is still interacting with their device, may assume that they have left to grab a coffee and start delivering notifications to their phone, causing it to buzz distractingly, instead of displaying notifications on their desktop or incrementing a badge count. Source: https://wicg.github.io/idle-detection/#introduction https://wicg.github.io/idle-detection/#introduction
  - cdirkx 5y ago
    > the messaging application, not being able to observe that the user is still interacting with their device, may assume that they have left to grab a coffee and start delivering notifications to their phone, causing it to buzz distractingly, instead of displaying notifications on their desktop or incrementing a badge count. Is any webapp doing this? To me it sounds like multiple steps into the future: - First a webapp has to have the capability to notify just one device, so in this case your browser and not also your phone. I cant think of an app where you dont receive double notifications on web+mobile (or triple with a smartwatch). - The webapp then needs to be smart enough to dynamically select the "most active" device to send the notification to. - The new feature can then be used as a workaround for "incorrectly" classifying your computer as an inactive device, because you are not interacting with the webpage anymore.
  - fsckboy 5y ago
    giving the users explicit control over where their messages are sent is a good idea. being spied on supposedly so the system can decide where to send you messages is a bad idea.
    - Talanes 5y ago
      An opt-in system to allow idle detection is an explicit control. It shouldn't be the only option, but denying that it should be an option at all feels a little infantilizing.

BystanderX 5y ago

Because if there's a facility that grants out-of-browser data to the remote, the remote can deny service unless it is enabled. Unless the feature is designed to fake data and make permission status opaque to the remote, it's a privacy reduction that will happen, the only question is when.

tclancy 5y ago

What situations would you ever want to let a site know this?

ghuin 5y ago
Marking you as away on discord/teams
- superduperuser 5y ago
  Disord's idle/away seems to be working for me in FF.
x0x0 5y ago
chat, video conferencing, maybe forums, spotify when it has conflicting play instructions between a browser and a different device

kube-system 5y ago

There's two reasons why I think it's a bad idea, along with a number of other Chrome APIs: 1. Most people aren't engineers and don't understand the privacy implications of this, and these types of metadata collections. Browsers aren't just developer tools, they are made for the general public. 2. I already get spammed by too many permission popups; rarely are they for purposes that benefit the user. It would be interested to see some stats on how many users simply accept these popups to dismiss them without regard for the consequences.

birthdaydog 5y ago

"Sorry! Looks like something went wrong. In order to use our site you'll have to enable idle tracking. This helps us improve our software for customers like you!"

ghuin 5y ago
That won't happen as long as Safari doesn't implement the API. For example: notifications
- iainmerrick 5y ago
  If you’re saying the feature is only OK as long as at least one major browser doesn’t implement it, to prevent it getting traction, I don’t think it’s a good feature.
shadowgovt 5y ago
Hey, if they want their app to suck, I have alternatives.

sys_64738 5y ago

It’ll find a workaround that causes you to be asked permission constantly so you’ll give in and accept it. Web pages will do anything to manipulate APIs in nefarious utilization.

rambojazz 5y ago

As long as the permission is opt-in.