logoalt Hacker News

everdriveyesterday at 9:43 PM11 repliesview on HN

It's getting to the point where a user needs at minimum two browsers. One to allow all this horrendous client checking so that crucial services work, and another browser to attempt to prevent tracking users across the web.

Nick, I understand the practical realities regarding why you'd need to try to tamp down on some bot traffic, but do you see a world where users are not forced to choose between privacy and functionality?


Replies

mememememememoyesterday at 10:44 PM

Local models for privacy.

You want to go to the world's best hotel? You are gonna be on their CCTV. Staying at home is crappier but private.

Unfortunately for the first time moores law isn't helping (e.g. give a poor person an old laptop and install linux they will be fine). They can do that and all good except no LLM.

show 2 replies
0x3fyesterday at 9:49 PM

Meet me in a cafe and I will sign a JWT saying you're not a bot. You can submit this to whoever will accept it.

show 4 replies
kevin_thibedeauyesterday at 11:11 PM

I've been doing that for years. Cloudflare is slowly breaking more and more of the web.

subscribedtoday at 8:42 AM

This is indeed what I do. And you also should. Separate browser for banking, trusted shipping sites etc, and the normal one.

Make sure not to browse the Internet without adblock and/or similar.

lukewarm707today at 9:50 AM

i am increasingly moving towards a model of 'no browser'.

search for me is now a proprietary index (like exa) that filters rubbish, with a zero data retention sla. so we don't need google profiling.

the content is distilled into markdown pulled from cloudflare's browser rendering api.

i let cloudflare absorb the torrent of trackers and robot checks, i just get md from the api with nothing else. cloudflare is poacher and gamekeeper.

an alternative is groq compound which can call browsers in parallel.

for interactive sites, or local ai browsing, i sometimes run a browser in a photon os docker with vnc, which gives you the same browser window but it runs code not on your pc.

that said little of my use is now interacting with websites, its all agentic search and websets so i don't have to spend mental energy on it myself

show 1 reply
madroxyesterday at 10:44 PM

I am not Nick, but there's a few ways that world happens: the free tier goes away and what people pay for more correctly reflects what they use, this all becomes cheap enough that it doesn't matter, or we come up with an end to end method of determining usage is triggered by a person.

Another way is to just do better isolation as a user. That's probably your best shot without hoping these companies change policies.

atoavyesterday at 11:43 PM

What if I run a website and OpenAI produces bot traffic? Do they also consider it abuse when they do it?

SV_BubbleTimeyesterday at 9:49 PM

Firefox multicontainers are pretty cool. But it’s an advanced process that most people wouldn’t do or do correctly.

show 3 replies
gib444today at 11:35 AM

> It's getting to the point where a user needs at minimum two browsers. One to allow all this horrendous client checking so that crucial services work, and another browser to attempt to prevent tracking users across the web.

Every time I try this, I end up crossing wires (ie using the browser that 'works' for most things, more than the one that is 'broken')

cruffle_duffletoday at 2:56 AM

There is also the browser I use to get Claude to route around people blocking its webfetch. Both Playwright and chrome-mcp.

show 1 reply
gruezyesterday at 9:50 PM

>It's getting to the point where a user needs at minimum two browsers. One to allow all this horrendous client checking so that crucial services work, and another browser to attempt to prevent tracking users across the web.

What are you talking about? It works fine with firefox with RFP and VPN enabled, which is already more paranoid than the average configuration. There are definitely sites where this configuration would get blocked, but chatgpt isn't one of them, so you're barking up the wrong tree here.

show 1 reply