If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
Madison James wrote on 1/23/2015 5:49 PM:
I want to be as neutral as possible when posting to political forums. I use Panopticlick as my test of my browser fingerprint. I am working on changing that fingerprint, and one change is my reported "Screen Size and Color Depth" Here are all the viable screen sizes and color depths http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_display_standard Just before I log into the political forums, I want to temporarily set mine to the most common there is out there today. But what is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth today? Is it "1024x768x24" or "1366x768" or "1280x1024" or ? There is a current discussion on the Mozilla news server about a related Firefox topic: FF is reporting screen rather than window size if I understood what I read. The reason the discussion thread was started had to do with fingerprinting. It's the mozilla.support.firefox newsgroup under the news.mozilla..org server. -- Jeff Barnett |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
drek wrote:
Madison James wrote: what is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth today? One source lists 1366x768 as tops by a large margin. Yep, used by loads of el-cheapo wide screen laptops. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)
On 2015-01-25, Huge wrote:
On 2015-01-24, Mayayana wrote: | 1. The Panopticlick web site claims to promote privacy through | anonymity (suggesting browser configurations can be used to | identify posters, and offering to measure the user's.) | 2. Screen size and colour depth are configured for monitors | (hardware): browsers are software. No attribution. ******. Killfiled. Used the word ******. Killfiled, Not really, I'm not 13. -- _____ _______ ____ __ __ _____ _ / ____|__ __/ __ \| \/ | __ \ | | | (___ | | | | | | \ / | |__) | | | \___ \ | | | | | | |\/| | ___/ | | ____) | | | | |__| | | | | | |_| |_____/ |_| \____/|_| |_|_| (_) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
In article ,
"Don Phillipson" wrote: "Madison James" wrote in message ... I want to be as neutral as possible when posting to political forums. I use Panopticlick as my test of my browser fingerprint. . . . Just before I log into the political forums, I want to temporarily set mine to the most common there is out there today. But what is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth today? Is it "1024x768x24" or "1366x768" or "1280x1024" or ? 1. The Panopticlick web site claims to promote privacy through anonymity (suggesting browser configurations can be used to identify posters, and offering to measure the user's.) 2. Screen size and colour depth are configured for monitors (hardware): browsers are software. What's more "identifying" is the list of fonts they can retrieve from your system. -- Where's the Vangelis music? Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her. They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene. -- notes for Blade Runner |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
In article ,
Huge wrote: On 2015-01-24, Mayayana wrote: | 1. The Panopticlick web site claims to promote privacy through | anonymity (suggesting browser configurations can be used to | identify posters, and offering to measure the user's.) | 2. Screen size and colour depth are configured for monitors | (hardware): browsers are software. No attribution. ******. Killfiled. Must be hurtful. -- Where's the Vangelis music? Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her. They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene. -- notes for Blade Runner |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)
Warren Oates wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 09:17:42 -0500:
What's more "identifying" is the list of fonts they can retrieve from your system. What surprises me is that fonts aren't "more" standard than they are. For one, I could probably do with perhaps a dozen or so true-type fonts, for the most part (e.g., arial, symbol, helvetica, timesnewroman, couriernew, etc.). For another, why aren't the fonts more standardized across platforms (e.g., why would windows need different fonts than linux?). Is there a way to "reduce" the fonts to a standard package? |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)
Jeff Barnett wrote, on Sat, 24 Jan 2015 22:29:48 -0700:
FF is reporting screen rather than window size if I understood what I read. Firefox reports screen size. Tor Browser Bundle reports canvas size. It's better to report canvas size than screen size for this purpose. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
In article , Sage wrote:
What's more "identifying" is the list of fonts they can retrieve from your system. What surprises me is that fonts aren't "more" standard than they are. they cant be. For one, I could probably do with perhaps a dozen or so true-type fonts, for the most part (e.g., arial, symbol, helvetica, timesnewroman, couriernew, etc.). you might, but the rest of the world certainly would not be able to do that. what a boring world it would be if everyone used the same font. For another, why aren't the fonts more standardized across platforms (e.g., why would windows need different fonts than linux?). because linux users won't pay for the original fonts so they end up with knockoffs that are never exactly correct or as good. Is there a way to "reduce" the fonts to a standard package? only if you want to have everything look wrong. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)
nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:25:54 -0500:
what a boring world it would be if everyone used the same font. I didn't say the "same font". I said the "same fonts". How many fonts does the average person need? We're not talking specialists. We're talking mom and pop, who basically surf the web and read their email? How many fonts does the average person (explicitly) use anyway? I use a monospaced font and a kerning font,and that's about it. So, two Truetype fonts would do me just fine. I guess my question would be how "I" could make "my" fonts more "standard" so that they don't give me away. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)
nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:25:54 -0500:
because linux users won't pay for the original fonts so they end up with knockoffs that are never exactly correct or as good. What does that mean? I'm not sure what an "original" font is, but, to me, a font is pretty darn simple. I could live with two (one monospaced and one not mono spaced), both truetype, and that would cover almost everything I do, which is read the web and type email and Usenet posts. For example, I have absolutely no idea (nor do I care) what font I'm currently typing in, so, why would I want an "original" (whatever that is) or any other font. I'd just want, for privacy reasons, the "same" font that everyone else was using. How would I do that? |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)
nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:25:54 -0500:
Is there a way to "reduce" the fonts to a standard package? only if you want to have everything look wrong. When I type email, in Google Mail, I don't care *what* font is used. Same with typing this message to you in Usenet. a. I don't even *know* what font is being used, and, b. I wouldn't care if some other (reasonable) font was used. It looks fine to me in whatever font I'm using. How does this message (the font) look to you? What font am I using anyway? And why would I care to change it? |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
On Sunday 25 January 2015 17:54, Huge conveyed the following to
alt.os.linux... On 2015-01-25, Sage wrote: nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:25:54 -0500: because linux users won't pay for the original fonts so they end up with knockoffs that are never exactly correct or as good. What does that mean? It means "nospam" is a tedious ****. Not to mention a bigoted troll. -- = Aragorn = http://www.linuxcounter.net - registrant #223157 |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
Mayayana wrote:
Since the late 90s it's been possible to view newsgroups in "thread view", which display the order and relationship of posts. With thread view it's very easy to see new posts and to see the relationship between posts. However, it is possible with threaded views to view only unread messages, and I for one prefer that combination, especially in groups where threads are long-running and someone may reply into a backwater of thread. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
| How many fonts does the average person need?
| We're not talking specialists. | I use quite a few for graphics. Anything that looks good I'll install, in order to have options. Most people don't work with graphics, but they often get new fonts from software, scanners, printers, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if, for instance, an installed version of MS Office could be identified. I know that some of the Wingdings fonts only came with MS Office. OS version should also be identifiable. So if you were on Linux and wanted to hide that you might want to install the set of fonts that comes with Windows 7. | I guess my question would be how "I" could make "my" fonts more | "standard" so that they don't give me away. | This listing might give you some ideas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._Windows_fonts |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (for panopticlick)
In article , Sage wrote:
because linux users won't pay for the original fonts so they end up with knockoffs that are never exactly correct or as good. What does that mean? it means that font designers create fonts to be sold (no surprise there, as it's a lot of work to create) and linux users won't pay for much of anything, so linux users end up with knockoff fonts that may not have the same metrics and might not look correct when substituted for the real thing. I'm not sure what an "original" font is, but, to me, a font is pretty darn simple. fonts are *very* complex, and basically works of art. the museum of modern art in new york even has a collection: http://www.moma.org/explore/inside_o...-fonts-23-new- faces-in-moma-s-collection I could live with two (one monospaced and one not mono spaced), both truetype, and that would cover almost everything I do, which is read the web and type email and Usenet posts. as i said, that might work for you but it sure won't work for others. adobe's font folio includes more than 2400 fonts, and that's just *one* collection from one company: http://www.adobe.com/products/fontfolio.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|