tracked

People would still use disconnect and adblock to make sure that their search queries are not being tracked.

You basically get to pay $4 a month to not see ads (and therefore not get tracked).

The radar detection range was indeed reduced by an order of magnitude but once detected they could be tracked.

Sooner or later the source of unwanted printed content could be tracked down.

I'm especially not OK with being tracked when it has absolutely zero benefit for me, long or short term.

I know we are tracked it's just that I never thought it will come to this.

We're getting side tracked somewhat, but these preferences are a bit arbitrary.

On one hand I totally get why people don't want to be tracked (I don't).

I’m not okay with being tracked, and I don’t care whether the tracker swears to be or not to be evil.

Not to mention that then there are most likely a bunch of additional modules that have to be tracked down to get something to work.

Well, I thought Google already tracked you whichever browser you use, via its advertising networks.

But online ads are very often performance tracked, and the entire reason that some demographics are so expensive is that the ads to them perform well.

Tracking is the only way for Google to get traffic data; you could still not find that reason enough to get tracked, but it's not "zero benefit" for users.

This, of course, won't stop people from arguing they have a right not to be tracked or advertised at, which means that they will essentially be arguing in favor of a right to have their programs make fradulent requests in order to get this "free" content.

What you call "nutty" I call "a dial-up Internet connection" or "a congested network due to streaming content or large downloads." If Win10 only did this while the entire network is guaranteed to be idle, and if it can guarantee it is on a landline DSL or better connection whose usage isn't tracked, then it would be okay.