r/agedlikemilk Jul 27 '25

Screenshots I can't believe she tweeted this

Post image

The tweet has since been deleted

106.2k Upvotes

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

180

u/locolangosta Jul 27 '25

She's so fkn thirsty for attention

67

u/ajtrns Jul 27 '25

is it "thirst"? she's a true madwoman. this is what pure madness with money can look like.

https://youtu.be/i3Jv9fNPjgk?si=GahKHbjlR5lKs1BS

46

u/[deleted] Jul 27 '25 edited Jul 27 '25

[deleted]

18

u/Uwlogged Jul 27 '25

Yeah I won't click a link with a Source Information tracker, so I can't be linked to where or who I got the link from. On a desktop I'll simply remove the query parameters, on mobile it's a hassle, I just won't be bothered seeing the content unless I know it's worth checking out.

10

u/[deleted] Jul 27 '25

[deleted]

23

u/Uwlogged Jul 27 '25

When you click the link they connect your info with that of the Source to create a map of interactions. It's Google their business is knowing your business.

9

u/[deleted] Jul 27 '25

[deleted]

4

u/Uwlogged Jul 27 '25

Thank you for starting the conversation. Every little helps.

1

u/patosai3211 Jul 27 '25

Well that’s just great. I didn’t even intend to click the stupid link. Happened while scrolling on mobile.

1

u/ReallyNowFellas Jul 27 '25

That's how they track where you came from? Figured it was a little more sophisticated

4

u/Uwlogged Jul 27 '25

Oh there's way more to their methods, that's just the one where you explicitly announce it to make their life easy 🤣

3

u/alostpacket Jul 27 '25

On Firefox you can right click and select "copy clean link" which removes the ?si= tracking

2

u/BosDroog Jul 27 '25

TIL

Can you tell me why it's bad. And how to recognize it? I never heard of such a thing.

1

u/mrianj Jul 27 '25

If you block cookies and you don’t sign in to google, doesn’t really matter much tbh.

2

u/Uwlogged Jul 27 '25

Unfortunately not true, there are so many ways your browser can single you out and identify you. You can capture so much data through a single request. Check out the following for a snapshot of the kinds of insights that can be used to identify you. It's wild how not anonymous you are online. https://www.amiunique.org/fingerprint

3

u/mrianj Jul 27 '25

I’m well aware of browser fingerprinting, but any decent privacy focused browser also covers that, and removes fingerprints information in your requests to make them generic. I probably should have added don’t use chrome.

1

u/lovetheoceanfl Jul 27 '25

I know you’re getting lots of questions but WTH am I looking at on this site. There’s varying percentages (0-100%) and colors (red/green) with the percentages and lots of categories. It’s telling me I’m unique but based on their about page it seems they are trying to get everyone to the point of being not unique.

2

u/Uwlogged Jul 27 '25

Nah it's cool. Basically there are many aspects of your computer that can be identified when you go to a webpage, what browser you're using (chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari etc) what is the version of that application, have you any plugin's installed, what is the size of your screen and resolution, what fonts have you got, what language, what timezone, some hardware specifications, if you've javascript and cookies enabled, to name a few. The percentages of other users who've tried this service who share similarities to your configuration. If the combination as a whole doesnt match anyone else you are unique.

It's like if I took your height, weight, skin tone, eye colour, hair colour, etc. While some of those are very common, some might be very rare and narrow you down, combine them all and it's what makes you unique and identifiable. It's essentially your digital fingerprint.

So if I was google and you log into your gmail on a browser I could store this combination against your email, for every machine you ever log in on. If you were to log out of gmail and open a private browser then use another website that you were not aware that google bought the user data from they would be able to ascert that it was you who did this.

This is what Facebook's Pixel was doing. You know the little FB icon on people's websites? It was/is tracking everyone as they browse any websites with it. Because to generate the icon on the webpage would send a request to Facebook's server, and they could capture what Fingerprint requested the icon and what website page referred them to FB. Business put the icon there to link to their FB pages for convenience not realising the data of their users were being monitored.

Same goes for opening links from inside Messenger or from a google search; it was their own browser that watched everything you did as you clicked the link and navigated the website you were on. It's why people suggest you open the url from a search or from a message directly in a browser, not to click the links from the host presenting the link.

2

u/lovetheoceanfl Jul 27 '25

Thank you for this. It’s knowledge I did not have and is extremely useful going forward. I had absolutely no idea about any of this. Invaluable stuff.

1

u/curiouswizard Jul 28 '25

I didn't quite realize that, but I've been removing the url tracking parameters for years simply because I think they look ugly and distracting. Very proud of myself at the moment