Google won´t like it, but what would be the effect on the web? No tracking, no ad income, so no web OR can we go back to the old ways of untargeted ads.
After all, televisions don´t spy on your living room to serve you ´context-sensitive´ ads. Traditional media advertising lived without a detailed profile.
Are website owners right in their claim they really need to place all these tracking cookies to survive or should the industry go one step back and accept anonymous visitors? #SocMed
Originally shared by +Stephen Shankland
Microsoft is promoting its Do Not Track stance in Internet Explorer. I wonder how that logjam of privacy vs. advertiser is going? (Background: Microsoft is aggressive in enabling the tracking-protection feature, but advertisers have threatened to ignore it if it's set by default.)
Actually, both Microsoft and Samsung have patents pending right now on TV equipment that DOES spy on you. It looks at what you are doing while you are watching TV and programs ads custom built for you.
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/your-tv-watching-you-latest-models-raise-concerns-483619
They aren't spying on me on my living room? Umm yes they are.. the cable companies have set top boxes and they know what we watch.. they haven't started singling out homes just yet but they do watch us.. more than we watch them…
I´m aware of the ideas +Rick Marcum +Damon Hopkins and the technological possibilities, but I would expect the public to reject it. Unlike tracking cookies which are by and large accepted.
Well, the draft standard for do-not-track states clearly that there are 3 possible states: yes, no, and not yet decided. Microsoft is just doing their own thing here, while the w3c and google are opposed to this.
In other words, business as usual here, nothing to see.
—
Of course it's worth mentioning that DNT doesn't actually do anything unless the servers respect it. It isn't a technical measure at all. By defaulting to 'no', Microsoft is just pushing websites to ignore the DNT setting.
+Max Huijgen you expect too much from the public I'm afraid.. they won't reject it because it will be presented as if it's a desirable feature.. Don't you want better shows and programming for your enjoyment.. here let me program you.. see that's better.. personalized TV just for you.. the public eats what they are fed. They are fed what is marketed by the people in power and they eat it up and ask for more because they are programmed to do so.. I don't watch TV anymore. I stopped quite awhile ago. There are no shows I watch regularly and there hasn't been for a very long time.
+Roelf Renkema It's an http header field.
+Edouard Tavinor my question is not what w3c wants, but what the public would decide if they realized they had a choice.
+Roelf Renkema then roll it over to a new one and start again.. besides Dave Ramsey can help me out in the end.. I just have to skimp for a while and then its back to normal… that's what my brother and a few others I know have done.. I've been too broke to count I don't have a credit card.. Lol.
+Max Huijgen DNT's just the wrong technology for this. Google's initial opposition to it is right on the money. DNT does nothing other than provide an illusion of privacy.
+Roelf Renkema http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/
+Edouard Tavinor if Google and Yahoo would respect the DNT (and it´s easy to make sure they do through the EC and US regulators) 95% of the tracking problem would be solved.
+Max Huijgen How come? Are 95% of the websites people visit Google or Yahoo sites?
And how would the EU check if Microsoft, Facebook et al. comply? would you give the EU access to all Microsoft and Facebook servers, no matter where they're located?
+Shaker Cherukuri I think you are right, I know some mjor companies who are going to use an "active layer"-on screen- with their broadcasts, so no more extra device needed for interactive TV, cool feature but traceable….
The online ad industry is dominated by Google and Yahoo is a reasonably large player as well +Edouard Tavinor hence the 95%.
As for access to the servers; no need for physical access but regulators already monitor the larger players.
So how did this end up in yet another Microsoft bash fest? Why not discuss tracking instead?
I don't like tracking and I don't want companies tracking me without consent. Which is why I turned on the 'DNT' feature in my Safari, don't allow 3rd party cookies to be set, turned OFF personalized ads in Google, and actively filter any and all ads and tracking stuff coming my way.
My web experience is a wonderfully quiet, undisturbing and fast experience. While I have no illusions about still being tracked in some way, at least I made a reasonable effort to prevent at least a chunk of it. And as better tools come along, I will use those to do a better job.
Tracking should be a choice. I own my information, and nobody else. If my information is valuable, than I should be the one deciding who to sell that information for and on what conditions. And if companies can't regulate themselves to do so, the government should step in and make sure they do.
+Max Huijgen How do they monitor them? What about the tracking done by sites other than ad networks?
DNT remains a legal answer to a problem which could be resolved using technical measures.
+Gijs van Dijk Yes, tracking is a choice. As is if a site chooses to let you view its content or not.
+Edouard Tavinor If a site wants to exclude me and all the others that do not appreciate tracking, that is their choice. There are a few billion alternate sites that don't necessarily want to track or object to me not wanting it. That's the beauty of choice.
What's even better, is that if today someone as big as Google would decide to block everyone that blocks trackers and ads, tomorrow there will be a free alternative that doesn't putting it out of business. That's the beauty of the Internet.
But what is your beef? You seem to be hell bound on how great tracking is. You haven't even responded to my argument that my privacy and my information are and should be owned by me, not Corporate Inc. It is my right to give that information out if I so chose, it is not their right to take it if they want it.
wow the wierdest thing just happened. i did not know i could turn off tracking. lol as soon as i did, G+ booted me, not cool. best way to lose me is to dictate to me what i can or can not do, either on line or in real life, wtf? so i guess they think they have a right to track us. ummmm no. not without asking permission. if G+ starts to act to much like FB then i'll be on the first train outta here. thanks for the heads up.
+Gijs van Dijk Well at the moment most people are giving them this information. I don't like tracking either, it's just dnt is not the solution.
There's a gray line about what tracking is. If I walk into a shop for mobile phone accessories and the salesperson notices I have a phone of a certain make, it would be not amiss of them to offer me accessories for this make of phone.
+jack ball If 'turning off tracking' in your case meant 'telling Google to forget that I was logged in', then yes, Google would boot you out.
as well as not wanting to be tracked, its kind of a wasted effort on thier part. i don't look for or pay any attention what so ever to advertising when i'm on line. if i need something i will go directly to a companies website to order. but i don't go looking for things that i don't need. which seems to be the most crap i see advertised online. i have no problems with my penis working. i don't care what some nutjob thinks about Obama. and phone adverts just simply annoy me. i never have given a damn about fashion or fashion design. i'll never care that there are starving children across the world that some corprate dodge is trying to get me to send money to, i help out locally as much as i am able too. these are the things that are always popping up as advertisement on just about every website one visits. fafcebook became unbearable due to thier ads policy and it can die a slow death that eats the money straight out of zuckerboys pocket. i understand that internet has become a new media for just about anything you want to use it for. but advertising is going to kill it if they don't control themselves with the tons of garbage adverts they put out daily. sorry for rambling on +Max Huijgen wasn't trying to hijack ya post.
+Edouard Tavinor , didn't know that was gonna happen. i also didn't know that i could turn it off. was just an expieriment. know i see why its like it is. still don't care to be tracked simply because they think they need to know my habits.
+Roelf Renkema no bluff intended, i left facebook because it turned out to be garbage, nothing but an ad filled gossip machine. no thanks. G+ so far has been much better and i can actually tailor it to my wants. and please don't compare technology with some bullshit religion like that. no comparison at all.
wasn't a rant just a ramble, a rant infers anger. i'm not angry at all. +Roelf Renkema
oh and +Roelf Renkema, i just took your question as a smart alec remark. didn't think you expected an answer.
+Roelf Renkema , soory bud but my train doesn't have a predestined destination. i also don't "need" google or any other website to make my life complete. its just that i have more time to do nothing these days and i find this place to my amusement. nothing more. i also don't know enough about that wacko religion to use it for comparison. all i know is that they had to use blackmail to even get the government to acknowledge them as a religion, to get the tax breaks that all the others do.
yes i know that. and i'm also not one to worry that big brother is watching my every move. i know google is nothing but a commercial enterprise trying to make a profit. but if thier tracking softwear is so good then they should also realise i'm a waste of time as far as what they may target to me. i'm not a follower of the advertising giants. but they can waste all the time and money they wish to find that out.
me? lol save your breath son. are you mad about something now? geez give it a rest.
ok i got ya. but i meant as far as them or anyone else trying to target me, with ads is a waste of thier time as i have no intent to buy a thing because of over published advertising, simple really. i have friends that think i'm an ass because i won't go to certain stores or resturaunts with them because i disagree with policies of said stores or resturaunts.
thats my point young fella. i don't see any ads here at G+. thats why i like it here. and its not really behavioural science. its more like advertising science. and it really really doesn't concern me enough to loose any sleep over it. i was merely posting my thoughts on it. you are reading to much into it, if i wished to be a part of thier mess i'd volunteer my info. its that simple. or they could be like normal folks and just politely ask, instead of trying to be sneaky with all these tracking devices.
ok ok we are the same age then. and i have no idea who eric is or that he went to nk. and yes google fb and all the rest are getting to big for there britches. why else would the governments of the world be trying to get laws like sopa an cispa passed. well not the govs so much as the corparations that want control of it(internet) for thier own profit.
no clue. if hes some kinda IT guy i wouldn't know. my background is in materials science an construction technologies. if my puter acts up i have a guy or two that fix it.
a corprate schill in other words? nothing new there, only who he works for. its not something i follow as far as business goes. if its something that i need to worry about, i'm sure someone close to me will enlighten me to it.
Money doesn't talk, that's just spin, it fucks everything in its path.