Panopticlick says Icecat better than Tor-browser?

[Scooby]

I compiled a new version of icecat and sailed in to
https://panopticlick.eff.org to check fingerprint.

I got

"one in 1,550,338 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."

The value was about the same with
window maximized or the size it started with.

Then I thought to try tor-browser for comparison and got

"one in 4,930 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."

That is realy good. This was with the size of window as it was started with.
way better than icecat.

Then I tried with tor-browser maximized and got.

"one in 2,067,119 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."

that's worse than icecat!

The browser is much more trackable maximized.

[amigo]

I think you are misunderstanding the figures. The more browsers there are that look just like yours, the less trackable you are. If your browser has a unique fingerprint, then you are 'perfectly' trackable.

[Scooby]

Yeah I thought so to at first but if you read carefully

"one in 4,930 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."

happens more often than

"one in 2,067,119 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."


You want as many as possible with the same fingerprint


If the whole selection is like 9G (9 billion)???

then one in 4K is

9B/4K = 2250000 with the same fingerprint as you

and one in 2M is

9B/2M = 4500 with the same fingerprint as you


right?

[Flash]

9 billion seems an unreasonable number. There are only (!) around 7 billion people on Earth, and quite a few of them don't have a computer.

[Scooby]

9 billion seems an unreasonable number. There are only (!) around 7 billion people on Earth, and quite a few of them don't have a computer.

Yeah true that.

I only grabbed that number to illustrate how to interpret the text given by panopticlick.