Google is adding a visualization tool to its analytics stream that gives website operators a more graphical representation of who is visiting their pages. Speaking at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco Susan Wojcicki, senior vice president of advertising for Google, showed off the first two tools based around the visualization …
What happens to the site's statistics when a user blocks all the google analytics scripts, loads, and cookies by using no script, adblock+, and dis-allowing cookies?
I use myself as an example. ;)
@Sporkinum - I'm afraid you are part of an small minority who make virtually no difference to visitor analyses. I would guess less than 1% of visitors block scripts and cookies. That is still an excellent margin of error for any analyst to embrace. :-)
...that you instruct your firewall not to send or accept anything using an insecure protocol, such as http, ftp, smtp, or pop.
To be even more secure, uninstall all applications that use the internet.
To be even more secure, disconnect your computer, attach 1kg of explosive to it and blow it up.
To be even more secure, murder every member of your family and anyone else that might know something about you.
To be completely secure, kill yourself so that nobody can torture your secrets out of you.
I hope this helps.
To answer your question; then you'll be invisible to them.
Although I agree with the other opinions wrt amount of people actually blocking stuff (it sits permanently in NoScript on my end) I still think you do raise an interesting point.
Blocking data not generated by the website itself is slowly but steadily catching on it seems. First you have your average spamblockers (Adblock+ for example, there are plenty of others), proxy servers which can block advertising contents (before AdBlock I used to keep a blacklist around in Squid) but virus scanners are also jumping onto the bandwagon.
It wouldn't be the first time (nor the last I think) where several websites became a threat all at once because some advertisement service they all used got overrun; as such the websites were actively spreading virusses and/or malware (or worse).
Still, bottom line.. For "easy" realtime stats stuff like Google-analytics will do fine. But for maximum reliability you'd want to parse your logfiles. For example; Google analytics won't be able to tell you all the hits you're missing out on (404's).
... it doesn't answer the question that many small European website operaters want to know.
Under an EU law which came into force in the spring, my website is illegal because it uses Google analytics but doesn't give the user an opt-out option before it places the necessary cookies on their computer.
Is Google interested in this problem? Obviously, nobody wants to put an opt-in dialog on their website, because a significant number of visitors will see it as a "DANGER! HACKERS! RADIATION! GENETICALLY MODIFIED! KEEP CLEAR!" deterrent, but everyone desperately wants to know how many people are reading / interacting with their website.
I'd be pleased to hear that Google, Yahoo and other major players in this industry are working with the EU to try and find a compromise.
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems
- Feature Scotland's BIG question: Will independence cost me my broadband?
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro
- FTC to mobile carriers: If you could stop text scammers being jerks that'd be just great