joshyi
Joined 10 years ago
Joined 10 years ago
However, for devops, relying too much on these tools can be a trap, potentially causing security and server issues without immediate detection. Our team opts for goaccess for this reason. We prioritize accurate data from logs and scrutinize traffic patterns, focusing beyond just distinguishing between human and bot counts, a task we leave to the marketing/product department.
Even for personal websites, relying solely on JS can compromise security. We require precise data, and logs prove more dependable than JS, especially with the increasing number of tools tampering with JS data.
We should steer clear of the trap of exclusively focusing on the count of human visitors.
JS analytics face an escalating risk of inaccuracies due to the myriad ways data can be manipulated, resulting in the generation of unreliable events from JavaScript endpoints. Keeping up with the industry reveals an emerging trend of blockers using AI-driven detection, diminishing the relevance of JavaScript analytics in such scenarios.
While JS analytics tools might be of more interest to the marketing team, they are not as crucial for the devops team.
JavaScript analytics are increasingly prone to inaccuracies due to numerous methods available for manipulating data, leading to the generation of inaccurate events from JavaScript endpoints. Staying current in the field reveals a growing trend of blockers employing AI-driven detection, rendering JavaScript analytics less relevant in these cases.
No privacy issues to worry about using trackers.
btw, JS-based analytics are no longer as accurate for identifying "real humans" as they used to be. bots have gotten much better at behaving like a person behind a keyboard, so it's increasingly easy for them to make your analytics tool think they're a real user