Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (8881)

• New proposed ePrivacy Regulation and why Piwik might not need tracking consent compared to Google Analytics & co

  11 janvier 2017, par InnoCraft — Community

  The EU is proposing new ePrivacy Regulations. The proposed Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications will increase the protection of people’s private life and open up new opportunities for business.

  

  The new ePrivacy Regulation proposal

  The proposal mentions several changes for example to the “Cookie Law” where no longer a cookie consent will be needed when the cookies improve the user’s internet experience, for example to remember the shopping cart history or when completing a form over several pages.

  However, consent to track a user’s behaviour may be needed in the future, unless the analytics data collection is hosted on the first-party website.

  From TheRegister : O’Neil noted a minor change in which visitors to a website for analytics purposes do not require consent, as long as any personal data collected is only processed by the first party.

  

  First party Analytics respecting privacy

  Piwik is an open-source analytics platform that is used on more than 1 million websites and apps in over 150 countries, and available in more than 50 languages. The difference with other analytics solutions is that you can download and install Piwik on your own infrastructure. Websites and mobile apps tracking users with their own Piwik very likely won’t require a consent from their users if these regulations become reality.

  We have regularly written about why privacy matters, or more recently 11 ways Piwik Analytics helps you to protect your visitors privacy.

  Besides the standard Piwik features, there are Premium Features that let businesses and organizations further maximize their success based on the tracked data. Need help in hosting Piwik on premise ? InnoCraft are THE Piwik experts and know it best as it is the company of the makers of Piwik. InnoCraft provides support subscriptions and enterprise packages to help you setting up, configuring and maintaining Piwik on your infrastructure as well as offer training and custom development.

  

  We’re excited to be building the best digital analytics platform which respects our privacy on the Internet.

  Thank you for being a valued member of the Piwik community !

• Revision 31960 : Sur la page de création de chaque menu, un lien direct pour voir ce qu’il ...

  7 octobre 2009, par rastapopoulos@… — Log

  Sur la page de création de chaque menu, un lien direct pour voir ce qu’il donne une fois généré.

• Zlib vs. XZ on 2SF

  21 juillet 2012, par Multimedia Mike — General, psf, saltygme, xz, zlib

  I recently released my Game Music Appreciation website. It allows users to play an enormous range of video game music directly in their browsers. To do this, the site has to host the music. And since I’m a compression bore, I have to know how small I can practically make these music files. I already published the results of my effort to see if XZ could beat RAR (RAR won, but only slightly, and I still went with XZ for the project) on the corpus of Super Nintendo chiptune sets. Next is the corpus of Nintendo DS chiptunes.

  Repacking Nintendo DS 2SF
  The prevailing chiptune format for storing Nintendo DS songs is the .2sf format. This is a subtype of the Portable Sound Format (PSF). The designers had the foresight to build compression directly into the format. Much of payload data in a PSF file is compressed with zlib. Since I already incorporated Embedded XZ into the player project, I decided to try repacking the PSF payload data from zlib -> xz.

  In an effort to not corrupt standards too much, I changed the ’PSF’ file signature (seen in the first 3 bytes of a file) to ’psf’.

  Results
  There are about 900 Nintendo DS games currently represented in my website’s archive. Total size of the original PSF archive, payloads packed with zlib : 2.992 GB. Total size of the same archive with payloads packed as xz : 2.059 GB.

  Using xz vs. zlib saved me nearly a gigabyte of storage. That extra storage doesn’t really impact my hosting plan very much (I have 1/2 TB, which is why I’m so nonchalant about hosting the massive MPlayer Samples Archive). However, smaller individual files translates to a better user experience since the files are faster to download.

  Here is a pretty picture to illustrate the space savings :

  
  
  

  The blue occasionally appears to dip below the orange but the data indicates that xz is always more efficient than zlib. Here’s the raw data (comes in vanilla CSV flavor too).

  Interface Impact
  So the good news for the end user is that the songs are faster to load up front. The downside is that there can be a noticeable delay when changing tracks. Even though all songs are packaged into one file for download, and the entire file is downloaded before playback begins, each song is individually compressed. Thus, changing tracks triggers another decompression operation. I’m toying the possibility of some sort of background process that decompresses song (n+1) while playing song (n) in order to help compensate for this.

  I don’t like the idea of decompressing everything up front because A) it would take even longer to start playing ; and B) it would take a huge amount of memory.

  Corner Case
  There was at least one case in which I found zlib to be better than xz. It looks like zlib’s minimum block size is smaller than xz’s. I think I discovered xz to be unable to compress a few bytes to a block any smaller than about 60-64 bytes while zlib got it down into the teens. However, in those cases, it was more efficient to just leave the data uncompressed anyway.