Blurs

IP-based geolocation is basically a lookup system that maps an internet connection to an approximate physical area.  It’s widely used, but it’s important to understand what it can and can’t do. How it works When you connect to a service, your device uses an IP address (e.g. something like 82.xxx.xxx.xxx).  That IP is assigned by your internet provider (ISP). Geolocation databases (run by companies like MaxMind, IP2Location, etc.) map IP ranges to locations using: • ISP registration data (who owns that block of IPs) • Routing information (where traffic enters major internet hubs) • Data from Wi-Fi/mobile networks (crowdsourced or licensed) • Previous user/device location signals (in some cases) So instead of “tracking you,” it’s more like: “This block of IPs is usually used in or around Manchester.” How accurate it is It varies a lot: • City-level (like Manchester): often fairly accurate, but not guaranteed • Wrong city but correct country: common • Completely wrong region: ha...

Apple’s privacy changes—especially App Tracking Transparency (ATT)—didn’t stop tracking so much as break one of the main pipes used to connect identity across apps.  That forced ad networks (including Meta and others) to rebuild their systems around weaker, more indirect signals. Here’s what actually changed. 1) What ATT actually did App Tracking Transparency requires apps on iOS to ask: “Allow this app to track your activity across other companies’ apps and websites?” If the user says no, the app cannot access the IDFA (Identifier for Advertisers). That matters because IDFA used to be: • a stable device-level advertising ID • shared across apps • resettable but persistent enough for long-term tracking So ATT effectively: • cut off the easiest cross-app identity connector on iPhones 2) What got broken (significant disruption) A) Cross-app tracking collapsed Before ATT: • App A knows you installed App B • Both apps can share the same advertising ID • Ad networks stitch behaviour to...

How Destroying Wealth Can Help Create Wealth At first glance, the idea sounds absurd. How can destroying wealth possibly create more of it?  Wealth is usually associated with accumulation: more money, more assets, more production, more growth. Yet throughout history, periods of destruction have often been followed by bursts of innovation, productivity, and economic expansion. This paradox sits at the centre of capitalism itself. Economies do not grow simply because they preserve everything that already exists. They grow because outdated systems, inefficient businesses, and obsolete technologies are replaced by better ones. In many cases, wealth creation depends on the destruction of older forms of wealth. Economist Joseph Schumpeter famously called this process “creative destruction”. The Meaning of Creative Destruction Creative destruction describes the constant replacement of old economic structures with new ones. New inventions make older products irrelevant. New companies displ...

Reality as Simulation: Could God Be a Supercomputer? For centuries humanity has attempted to answer the same profound questions: Why does the universe exist? What is consciousness? Is there a creator?  Ancient civilisations answered through mythology and religion, while modern science has sought explanations through mathematics, physics, and observation.  Yet in recent decades an unusual idea has emerged at the intersection of philosophy, computer science, and cosmology: the possibility that reality itself is a simulation. This theory, often called the “simulation hypothesis”, proposes that the universe we experience may not be the fundamental level of existence. Instead, reality could be an artificial construct generated by an unimaginably advanced intelligence.  In some interpretations, this intelligence resembles what previous generations would have called God.  However, rather than a supernatural being existing outside physical laws, this “God” could be understoo...

Here’s a realistic “privacy stack” model—not the fantasy version where you disappear, but what actually works today against modern ad tracking and identity merging. We’ll split it into levels so you can see what each layer achieves. Level 1 — Basic privacy (stops most casual tracking) This is what most people mean by “private browsing,” but done properly. Use: • Brave Browser or hardened Firefox Add: • Block third-party cookies • Enable “strict tracking protection” • Disable cross-site tracking permissions • Use built-in ad/tracker blocking What this achieves: • Stops most ad retargeting (“you looked at shoes once, now they follow you”) • Reduces cookie-based identity linking • Cuts down tracking scripts significantly What it does NOT stop: • Fingerprinting (still quite possible) • Logged-in tracking (Google, Meta, etc.) • IP-based inference (basic level) Level 2 — Strong privacy (breaks most cross-site linking) Add on top of Level 1: • Separate browser profiles (work / personal / ran...

How To Check Your Own Browser Fingerprint Live: A Guide To Stateless Tracking Cookies used to be the main way websites recognised you. Now they’re only one small piece.  Modern tracking can still recognise you even if you block or delete cookies entirely, using what’s called stateless tracking —mainly fingerprinting and network inference. Here’s how it works in practice. Browser fingerprinting (the main replacement for cookies) Instead of storing a file on your device (cookie), websites identify your browser itself. Your browser quietly reveals a combination of traits like: • operating system (Windows, macOS, Linux) • browser type and version • screen size and colour depth • installed fonts • language and time zone • GPU + rendering behaviour (Canvas/WebGL) • audio processing quirks Individually, these are harmless. Together, they form a near-unique signature. So even if you: • block cookies • use private browsing • clear history …your “digital fingerprint” can still look the same ...