how-to block ads
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
1 edit | reply to interested party
Re: nebuad aka phoenix
said by interested party :
anyone have any thoughts on these issues:
1) what if the wireLINE isp of the user was imbedding the cookies and not the 3p wireline isps? Of course for PR sake you claim that the system you are using is not the same as that which caused prior issues. why would any entity digress, and use technology concept that is dated when first party isps are willing to allow such associations.
If, for example, Charter was actually interfering or simply eavesdropping the connection instead of Charter's vendor, NebuAd, it's still a wiretap either way. The wiretap act doesn't allow your phone company to tap your line for marketing purposes or any other purposes, outside of quality measurement/maintenance and in accordance with a lawful order of government.
I'm very keen on watching "Canoe Ventures" develop. Right now, they haven't crossed that line into using your surfing habits to determine what commercials to send to your TV's set top box. But I'm very certain that's why Charter was keen to take the NebuAd idea out for a spin -- by doing so, Charter learned users weren't about to tolerate that kind of intrusiveness, even though the net's advertising would be improved as a result.
said by interested party :
2) what if this system was used on a wireLESS isp system, let's say at a coffee shop for ie. Could the browser on the page loading be slow b/c it is embedding a similar cookie? Could the isp, that is acting as a search engine, claiming to be an advertiser or publisher, not be embedding cookies within an adnetwork, but be doing so at the point of entry in the search area on the page?
I think this is probably happening now in public wi-fi, hotels, and etc. -- and it doesn't need a cookie to do it (they can just use DPI). There seems to be an implicit expectation that free wi-fi comes with no responsibility for privacy, perhaps because users only use it here and there.
It's still illegal, but if users think that there's some cop on the beat protecting them from public wi-fi companies who are eavesdropping on their traffic, they're sorely mistaken. There's nobody watching our backs, here.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL | |
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Brooklyn NYC
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by funchords  :I'm very keen on watching "Canoe Ventures" develop. Right now, they haven't crossed that line into using your surfing habits to determine what commercials to send to your TV's set top box. Doesn't the very concept of "targeted advertising" mandate, by it's very nature, a violation of privacy?
In order to target ads, no matter what the technology, data about the target needs to be acquired. Such data acquisition by a party not directly in partnership with the target, is a privacy violation; IE, my cable company or ISP, have no business knowing whether or not I own a pet, what my politics are, what medical advice I am seeking, or any other personal data not directly associated with my relationship with the Cable or ISP operator. Furthermore, they have no right to sell or divulge such data, no matter for what purposes it was originally collected, to third parties.
Simply put, targeted advertising as a concept, needs to be made illegal on privacy grounds, and on the fact that it violates wiretap laws.
Bob
--
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
| |
-
|
