Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

  1. #1
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    This title is deliberately deceptive.

    FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer - Dec. 2, 2010

    FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    December 2, 2010: 1:47 PM ET
    ?

    NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Federal Trade Commission proposed this week that consumers should have a "do not track" option for the Internet, similar to the "do not call" list that exists to block telemarketers.

    Sounds great, right? With private data abuses and security lapses constantly popping up in the headlines, the idea of easily taking yourself off the radar might sound appealing.

    But the FTC's proposal faces fierce opposition, from both the tech industry and many lawmakers. And if it were adopted, it would open a Pandora's box of unintended consequences.

    The FTC's plan calls for a universal add-on piece of software that surfers could install on their Internet browsers to notify websites that they do not want any information about them to be collected. The proposal would need congressional approval before it could be enacted as an industry-wide mandate.
    ...
    But those in the industry warn that such an overarching policy would put billions of e-commerce and advertising dollars at risk. It would also unleash all kinds of unintended and undesirable effects on the very consumers the FTC is trying to protect.

    This is the most bald-faced bit of bull**** I've ever heard.

    I fully support online and offline privacy. Its absurd the lengths this writer goes to defend the secret collecting of personal data on people all in the name of MONEY.

    Now before I burn the bridge, can anyone defend this practice beyond the excuse of "it will hurt the profits of advertising companies who secretly collect data on you without permission"? Boo-****ing-hoo. We already have 1 big brother. We don't need more siblings, especially when they only have money on the mind.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  2. #2
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Now before I burn the bridge, can anyone defend this practice beyond the excuse of "it will hurt the profits of advertising companies who secretly collect data on you without permission"? Boo-****ing-hoo. We already have 1 big brother. We don't need more siblings, especially when they only have money on the mind.
    I couldn't care less for the advertising companies, but a huge portion of the web is only able to provide its content at no cost to the user by selling ad space. Depending on how broad the language is it could very well devalue ad space and threaten that business model. I'm not saying that this will happen, but it's not out of the question.

  3. #3
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    I couldn't care less for the advertising companies, but a huge portion of the web is only able to provide its content at no cost to the user by selling ad space. Depending on how broad the language is it could very well devalue ad space and threaten that business model. I'm not saying that this will happen, but it's not out of the question.
    The fact that you think that supports my belief that this article is purely a product of lobbying.

    The bill is not against webspace advertising. I.E., its not against putting signs, ads, popups, etc on your screen when you go to sites. Its about how companies secretly collect and store every site you go to, what you click, how long you spend there, what you buy, etc.

    Normally this isn't an issue. For example grocery store cards are often used as a means to track product purchases and spending habits. The difference is that that data is used within that store. When you have things like google-analytics, its like having a person follow and track EVERY store and place you go and compiling a complete personal profile on you to be sold to the highest bidder.

    Limited company use is acceptable. Widespread is an invasion of privacy.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    I dont mind some maintained cookies or google accounts history, frankly it occasionally helps when I occasionally try to buy something. If Im lucky in a decade the cloud will understand that I am a man of taste and advertise accordingly.

  5. #5
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    scourge, I suggest you reread my post. You seem to have missed the point entirely

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    The bill is not against webspace advertising. I.E., its not against putting signs, ads, popups, etc on your screen when you go to sites.
    I do not suggest that it is

    Its about how companies secretly collect and store every site you go to, what you click, how long you spend there, what you buy, etc.
    As I state in my post, the impact will depend on how broadly the policy is worded. The FTC's testimony states that they already take action against companies that do the sort of thing about which you're speaking. This policy is not targeting this narrow sort of abuse. Their proposal does not use any more specific language than "targeted advertising," a category which includes even your average plain text google ads. If websites are prohibited from showing such ads, ad space value will fall along with ad revenue. That could easily threaten the business model of a huge swath of the web.

  6. #6
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    scourge, I suggest you reread my post. You seem to have missed the point entirely
    apologies if I misunderstood.


    [QUOTE=Kernel Sanders;1059134489]As I state in my post, the impact will depend on how broadly the policy is worded.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    The FTC's testimony states that they already take action against companies that do the sort of thing about which you're speaking.
    I'm not awar of that. Can you source that or reference the action they take?

    Is it only in the real world or in cyberspace as well?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    This policy is not targeting this narrow sort of abuse.
    I disagree. I does not directly address it but it circumvents it by disallowing that information from being collected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    Their proposal does not use any more specific language than "targeted advertising," a category which includes even your average plain text google ads. If websites are prohibited from showing such ads, ad space value will fall along with ad revenue. That could easily threaten the business model of a huge swath of the web.
    I understand and agree with your concern that laws need to be written concisely and unambiguously. I don't think that's cause enough to dismiss this initiative.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  7. #7
    Guru
    Councilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Riverside, County, CA.
    Last Seen
    11-04-11 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,454
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    This title is deliberately deceptive.

    FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer - Dec. 2, 2010

    This is the most bald-faced bit of bull**** I've ever heard.

    I fully support online and offline privacy. Its absurd the lengths this writer goes to defend the secret collecting of personal data on people all in the name of MONEY.

    Now before I burn the bridge, can anyone defend this practice beyond the excuse of "it will hurt the profits of advertising companies who secretly collect data on you without permission"? Boo-****ing-hoo. We already have 1 big brother. We don't need more siblings, especially when they only have money on the mind.
    If one wants to pay more for the use of a search engine and just about every other use of the internet please keep it to yourselves.

    I like having it as it is, and I would bet you have never been harmed because they track what you do.

    Or is this about some activity people might be ashamed of? If that is a fear again I say show where you have been harmed.

    Unless one is a criminal and your PC is taken by Law Enforcement there is nothing to worry about.

    By the way once Law Enforcement has someones PC that person has no secrets because unless you do a very good job of wiping the hard drive it's all there for ever.

    Besides everyone is being tracked by big brother with Carnivore, anyway. The FBI once made fun of the accusations calling it a Conspiracy theory because no one had the capability to do it.

    Now they are saying: Okay yea we did it, but we stopped. That is the BS.

  8. #8
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,830

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    This title is deliberately deceptive.

    FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer - Dec. 2, 2010




    This is the most bald-faced bit of bull**** I've ever heard.

    I fully support online and offline privacy. Its absurd the lengths this writer goes to defend the secret collecting of personal data on people all in the name of MONEY.

    Now before I burn the bridge, can anyone defend this practice beyond the excuse of "it will hurt the profits of advertising companies who secretly collect data on you without permission"? Boo-****ing-hoo. We already have 1 big brother. We don't need more siblings, especially when they only have money on the mind.
    The alternative is to pay a subscription to pretty much every website you go to.

    Google. Youtube. Pandora. News sites. Pretty much anything that isn't already a storefront.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #9
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by Councilman View Post
    If one wants to pay more for the use of a search engine and just about every other use of the internet please keep it to yourselves.

    I like having it as it is, and I would bet you have never been harmed because they track what you do.

    Or is this about some activity people might be ashamed of? If that is a fear again I say show where you have been harmed.

    Unless one is a criminal and your PC is taken by Law Enforcement there is nothing to worry about.

    By the way once Law Enforcement has someones PC that person has no secrets because unless you do a very good job of wiping the hard drive it's all there for ever.

    Besides everyone is being tracked by big brother with Carnivore, anyway. The FBI once made fun of the accusations calling it a Conspiracy theory because no one had the capability to do it.

    Now they are saying: Okay yea we did it, but we stopped. That is the BS.
    It could be compared to a peeping tom watching your wife undress. Does it hurt anyone? particularly if they are ignorant of the action. No probably not, but people do expect a degree of privacy in thier lives and for some this can cross that line.

    I am all for the option to block such tracking for those that wish to use it. If it doesnt bother you to be monitored and its not an issue, you can continue as you always have.

  10. #10
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    This title is deliberately deceptive.

    FTC 'do not track' plan would be a Google killer - Dec. 2, 2010

    This is the most bald-faced bit of bull**** I've ever heard.

    I fully support online and offline privacy. Its absurd the lengths this writer goes to defend the secret collecting of personal data on people all in the name of MONEY.

    Now before I burn the bridge, can anyone defend this practice beyond the excuse of "it will hurt the profits of advertising companies who secretly collect data on you without permission"? Boo-****ing-hoo. We already have 1 big brother. We don't need more siblings, especially when they only have money on the mind.
    I think this is much ado about nothing....this "secret collection of data," that is. Yes, websites know a particular computer has visited particular sites, how long it's been there, yada yada yada; but it uses this data in the aggregate; the data collected is compiled, correlated, and used to help marketers determine any variety of things. "Those who shop at Amazon are more likely to order from Brookstone," as a vanilla example. You aren't being tracked. No one can know who you are without legal intervention. And they don't care who you are.

    Your telephone company, as an example, collects this same kind of information about you -- much more directly and with the possibility of being much more damaging -- but, again, legal intervention is needed to access that information.

    People who expect others to maintain the world wide web, put content on there for free use, charge nothing for visiting their websites, let you copy/paste to your lil' heart's content, ought to be more than willing to let some background monitoring assist these companies with their marketing models. What's the big deal?
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •