>If I have a process that randomly installs and deletes wacky fonts, I'm unique at any given time, but the me of today can't be linked to the me of tomorrow, right?

See: https://xkcd.com/1105/

Services with a large enough fingerprinting database can filter out implausible values and flag you as faking your fingerprint, which is itself fingerprintable.

▲

NewsaHackO 2 hours ago | parent [-]

But they still wouldn't be able to confidently connect his different fingerprints to the same individual, just that he is one of a group of individuals who fake their fingerprints.

▲

gruez 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It would depend on what your existing fingerprint is. If you're using some sort of rare browser/OS/hardware combination (eg. pale moon/gentoo linux/IBM thinkpad) it might be worth spoofing, but if your configuration is relatively "normie" (eg. firefox/windows/relatively recent intel or amd cpu/igpu)you're probably making yourself stick out more by faking your fingerprint.

	▲	NewsaHackO an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The issue is that, especially on desktop, I doubt there are many fingerprints that more than 100 people have, given everything that they test. I would even suspect that most common desktop fingerprints are classified as bots.