Web analytics should at least meet the standards of informed consent December 4, 2020 on Drew DeVault's blog

Research conducted on human beings, at least outside of the domain of technology, has to meet a minimum standard of ethical reasoning called informed consent. Details vary, but the general elements of informed consent are:

  1. Disclosure of the nature and purpose of the research and its implications (risks and benefits) for the participant, and the confidentiality of the collected information.
  2. An adequate understanding of these facts on the part of the participant, requiring an accessible explanation in lay terms and an assessment of understanding.
  3. The participant must exercise voluntary agreement, without coercion or fear of repercussions (e.g. not being allowed to use your website).

So, I pose the following question: if your analytics script wouldn’t pass muster at your university’s ethics board, then what the hell is it doing on your website? Can we not meet this basic minimum standard of ethical decency and respect for our users?

Opt-out is not informed consent. Manually unticking dozens of third-party trackers from a cookie pop-up is not informed consent. “By continuing to use this website, you agree to…” is not informed consent. “Install uBlock Origin” is not informed consent.

I don’t necessarily believe that ethical user tracking is impossible, but I know for damn sure that most of these “pro-privacy” analytics solutions which have been cropping up in the wake of the GDPR don’t qualify, either.

Our industry’s fundamental failure to respect users, deliberately mining their data without consent and without oversight for profit, is the reason why we’re seeing legal crackdowns in the form of the GDPR and similar legislation. Our comeuppance is well-earned, and I hope that the regulators give it teeth in enforcement. The industry response — denial and looking for ways to weasel out of these ethical obligations — is a strategy on borrowed time. The law is not a computer program, and it is not executed by computers: it is executed by human beings who can see through your horseshit. You’re not going to be able to seek out some narrow path you can walk to skirt the regulations and keep spying on people.

You’re going to stop spying on people.

P.S. If you still want the data you might get from analytics without compromising on ethics, here’s an idea: compensate users for their participation in your research. Woah, what a wild idea! That’s not very growth hacker of you, Drew.

Articles from blogs I read Generated by openring

Disappointing phones

Since 2019, my phone has been a OnePlus 5T running LineageOS, and I've loved it.Unfortunately, it uses 3G for calls, and all New Zealand networks plan to turn off their 3G network in early 2026. I would still be able to use this phone for taking photo…

via Cadence's Weblog February 8, 2026

Trudging Through Nonsense

Last week Anthropic released a report on disempowerment patterns in real-world AI usage which finds that roughly one in 1,000 to one in 10,000 conversations with their LLM, Claude, fundamentally compromises the user’s beliefs, values, or actions. They not…

via Aphyr: Posts February 4, 2026

Binary Dependencies: Identifying the Hidden Packages We All Depend On

We need better tools for uncovering phantom binary dependencies. Not having these tools makes our global tech infrastructure less secure, and puts a strain on the Open Source maintainers we rely on.

via Vlad's Website January 31, 2026