Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #54945 > unrolled thread
| Started by | John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-01-18 21:50 -0800 |
| Last post | 2014-01-20 14:57 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 93 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Being tracked on the web John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2014-01-18 21:50 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-18 22:27 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-01-19 00:09 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Joanna Shuttleworth <js@example.com> - 2014-01-19 09:58 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-01-19 12:17 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-19 04:59 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-19 19:30 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2014-01-19 15:32 -0600
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 13:12 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-20 00:14 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-19 19:12 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 18:15 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-20 00:29 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 19:14 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-20 01:25 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 09:13 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-20 15:22 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 13:25 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 19:28 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-20 18:13 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 16:29 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-21 00:10 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-20 22:57 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 09:12 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-21 23:13 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-20 21:51 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 16:33 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-20 22:48 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 18:43 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 18:56 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-21 01:10 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 19:35 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-21 03:29 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 09:11 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-21 16:13 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 13:14 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-21 21:22 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-21 16:22 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 13:14 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-21 19:40 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 16:53 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-22 16:30 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-21 23:48 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 18:11 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Tom Stiller <clusterfux.upmon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-22 13:21 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 08:56 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-22 12:35 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-22 22:24 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-22 17:47 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 13:02 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-22 19:45 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 18:19 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-22 23:34 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 18:26 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-23 12:35 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-23 05:48 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-22 16:09 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 13:08 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-22 23:37 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 18:24 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-23 01:04 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-23 19:15 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-23 03:16 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-22 22:19 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-23 02:15 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 18:16 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web "Thomas R. Kettler" <tkettler@blownfuse.net> - 2014-01-22 09:43 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-21 17:22 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 13:14 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-20 23:25 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-21 00:10 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-20 16:10 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 16:34 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-20 23:36 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-21 18:48 +1300
Re: Being tracked on the web nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-21 00:10 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-21 00:56 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-19 03:37 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2014-01-19 20:25 +1100
Re: Being tracked on the web Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-01-19 14:20 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-01-19 12:26 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Tom Stiller <clusterfux.upmon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-19 13:27 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-19 11:02 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-01-19 16:08 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2014-01-19 08:24 -0800
Re: Being tracked on the web Earl Grey <earl@t.net> - 2014-01-19 12:43 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-01-19 12:46 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-19 18:54 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-19 18:06 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-20 00:03 +0000
Re: Being tracked on the web John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2014-01-19 13:49 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-19 18:12 -0500
Re: Being tracked on the web John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2014-01-20 14:57 -0500
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-23 01:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <52e0b0d6$0$59862$c3e8da3$e074e489@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #55211 |
On 14-01-23 00:24, Your Name wrote: > And again, yes, they collect statistical data for trend analysis, NOT > personal data that identifies you because they haven't got such > information This isn't for trend analysis. This is for personal behavious analysis so they can target ads at you. They don't need your identity to know that you have looked at pink panties websites, lesbian taking showers and soaping each other up, car mechanic tools, and looked to buy a pickup truck and firearms. They get a pretty good idea of what you like to do despite not knowing your name.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-23 19:15 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <230120141915507219%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #55213 |
In article <52e0b0d6$0$59862$c3e8da3$e074e489@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-01-23 00:24, Your Name wrote: > > > > And again, yes, they collect statistical data for trend analysis, NOT > > personal data that identifies you because they haven't got such > > information > > This isn't for trend analysis. This is for personal behavious analysis > so they can target ads at you. They don't need your identity to know > that you have looked at pink panties websites, lesbian taking showers > and soaping each other up, car mechanic tools, and looked to buy a > pickup truck and firearms. They get a pretty good idea of what you like > to do despite not knowing your name. You've simply proven what I said all along ... they are NOT and can NOT "track" *you personally*. They are "tracking" (for want of a better word) what the device does. Round and round and round the same circle. :-\
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-23 03:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lbqj5k$hqt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #55213 |
On 1/23/14, 1:04 AM, JF Mezei wrote: > On 14-01-23 00:24, Your Name wrote: > >> And again, yes, they collect statistical data for trend analysis, NOT >> personal data that identifies you because they haven't got such >> information > > This isn't for trend analysis. This is for personal behavious analysis > so they can target ads at you. They don't need your identity to know > that you have looked at pink panties websites, lesbian taking showers > and soaping each other up, car mechanic tools, and looked to buy a > pickup truck and firearms. They get a pretty good idea of what you like > to do despite not knowing your name. > > > According to Stanford Law School, they probably know your name. http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/6701
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-22 22:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bkaufpFb5m9U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #55196 |
On 2014-01-22, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > > And yet again, it is not and cannot track *you* - it has absolutely no > personal details about you at all. It does "track" what the computer / > device is doing. Regardless, it's not all that hard to link a person's identity to this collected information. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-23 02:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnle0uqk.1hsr.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #55199 |
In message <bkaufpFb5m9U2@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > On 2014-01-22, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: >> >> And yet again, it is not and cannot track *you* - it has absolutely no >> personal details about you at all. It does "track" what the computer / >> device is doing. > Regardless, it's not all that hard to link a person's identity to this > collected information. The assumption that some people have is that Google (or whomever) cares who each individual user is because they are tracking each individual user in order to present targeted advertising. This idea holds one because it is largely true, except in the most important sense, in that the *you* doesn't actually matter to Google at all. What Google sees is a collection of metrics that are not tied to an identity, by and large, that it uses to target those ads. There is also a separate mechanism that is tied to identity that will give you relevant search results out of your Google plus if you are logged in to Google, but these are not connected. Why are they not connected? Well, largely because there is no benefit to Google to connect them. So, other than enhancing your search results with stuff from G+, there is no *you* in the equation, rather there is non-identified collection of metadata that Google sorts through to give you better ads. And while people sometimes freak out about targeted advertising, the fact is that it is not only effective and therefore better for the advertiser, but it is also generally going to be of interest to the user. Targeted ads are a good thing. I wish my TV did that so I'd never have to watch ads for products I will never buy: Feminine hygiene product, cat foot, penis pills, multi-vitamins, or Samsung phones. We're in the infancy-stage of targeted advertising, and yes, sometimes it fails or is annoying, but it is getting better and that means it is getting more useful to me and to the advertiser. Also, Google lets you remove thing from your search history, which then removes them from the ad matrix, though most people don't seem to know about this. -- In the velvet darkness of the the blackest night Burning bright There's a guiding star
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-22 18:16 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <220120141816168955%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #55183 |
In article <52df4da6$0$59785$c3e8da3$e074e489@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > The problem with all this collection of data and sharing of data is that > errors and misinterpretation becomes way too easy when some computer > flags a person for having said the word "bomb" without understanding the > context of the statement. The "problem" is that the tin-foil hat brigade have spread lies and misinformation which far too many people blindly believe. Go to a library or a friend's house and use the computer to do a Google search on "pansy flowers", then go back to your own computer, and guess what, absolutely no adverts about pansy flowers suddenly start appearing ... why? Because Google hasn't and can't "track" *you*. They simply collect anonymous data which no doubt is sold as trend statistics to various companies.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Thomas R. Kettler" <tkettler@blownfuse.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-22 09:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tkettler-751E4F.09430922012014@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #55180 |
In article <220120141314529079%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > The queue for tin-foil hats and back-woods cabins with no electricity > starts over there ... just past the flock of levitating porcines. :-\ Meanwhile, the line for the Bobby McFerrin "Don't Worry, Be Happy" Tour is two rows to the right. Thank you. -- Remove blown from email address to reply.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-21 17:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lbmrv6$g08$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #55167 |
On 1/21/14, 3:11 PM, Your Name wrote: > > The queue for tin-foil hats and back-woods cabins with no electricity > starts over there ... just past the flock of levitating porcines. :-\ > I've been lucky regarding email spam. I remember only two problems. One was a scheme to clog servers by using infected PCs around the world to send out lots of email. The other was evidently overstock.com. I started to order a telephone from them. At some point they said it wasn't available. They asked for my email address so they could notify me if they came in. I gave it. Shortly afterward, I began receiving floods of spam. I suspected overstock because not many people had my email address, and it was fishy that they'd gotten me to order an item they didn't have. I don't remember how much personal information I'd provided before they told me they didn't have the item, but it seemed personal information could have been sold with my email address. If that's where the leak was, I don't know if the company itself is crooked. It could have been a single employee, or they could have been hacked. With tracking cookies, perhaps it could have been linked to my browsing. A few years ago, I kept seeing Choreboy scouring pads on the street and in parking lots. On the internet, I learned that they're used in smoking crack. It took a lot of searching because websites were unlikely to explain it clearly. Insurance companies would love browsing information by which they could identify crackheads even if it meant flagging 3 nonusers for every user. If I were labeled that way, I'd never know. Such information is not to be divulged to the individual.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-22 13:14 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <220120141314066337%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #55177 |
In article <lbmrv6$g08$1@dont-email.me>, J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> wrote: > On 1/21/14, 3:11 PM, Your Name wrote: > > > > The queue for tin-foil hats and back-woods cabins with no electricity > > starts over there ... just past the flock of levitating porcines. :-\ > > > I've been lucky regarding email spam. I remember only two problems. One > was a scheme to clog servers by using infected PCs around the world to > send out lots of email. The other was evidently overstock.com. > > I started to order a telephone from them. At some point they said it > wasn't available. They asked for my email address so they could notify > me if they came in. I gave it. > > Shortly afterward, I began receiving floods of spam. I suspected > overstock because not many people had my email address, and it was fishy > that they'd gotten me to order an item they didn't have. <snip> You actively providing personal information is a completely different thing to some mythical (and impossible) spying and stealing of your personal details. Yes, if you sign up to an email list, competition, etc. that company may well sell your email address to other people, and usually it will tell you so in the terms and conditions (which almost nobody ever bothers to read). By necesity of privacy laws in many countries, most of them these days have a specific tick box to opt in or out of such sharing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-20 23:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <52ddf6bd$0$46215$c3e8da3$3a1a2348@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #55109 |
On 14-01-20 19:25, Your Name wrote: > Simple fact: You do a Google search - Google doesn't have any personal > detaiils about you to pass on, even if they wanted to. At best they > have your IP address and what you search for or clicked on. Google may not have your identity, but they have your browsing history. You'd done searches for lingerie, then expect ads from Victoria's Secret. They don't know you as "John Doe from Elm Street", they know you as cookie #373638929 and that cookie tells them a lot about you without knowing your identity. Having said that, with Google pushing really hards its Google+ thing, it really wants people to remain logged in to Google, at which point, they have a far easier way to track you and build your profile. The problem with this is that when you bring your home laptop to the office, when you show something to your co-workers, the displayed ads will betray what you do at home in your private life. Now, imagine you did a search for "Barely legal teens" to learn more abourt Apple's policy to censor emails. Next day, you goto work and your peers see ads that are the result of that search.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-21 00:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <210120140010332297%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #55138 |
In article <52ddf6bd$0$46215$c3e8da3$3a1a2348@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > Simple fact: You do a Google search - Google doesn't have any personal > > detaiils about you to pass on, even if they wanted to. At best they > > have your IP address and what you search for or clicked on. > > > Google may not have your identity, but they have your browsing history. > You'd done searches for lingerie, then expect ads from Victoria's Secret. > > They don't know you as "John Doe from Elm Street", they know you as > cookie #373638929 and that cookie tells them a lot about you without > knowing your identity. however, if you signed into *another* site with your real name they can easily know who you are.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-20 16:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <mcmurtrie-A367CC.16103720012014@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au> |
| In reply to | #55039 |
In article <200120141914536275%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > In article <lbic85$ccm$1@dont-email.me>, J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> > wrote: > > On 1/20/14, 12:15 AM, Your Name wrote: > > > In article > > > <mcmurtrie-8476F5.19123219012014@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>, > > > Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote: > > >> In article <200120141312386196%YourName@YourISP.com>, > > >> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > > >>> In article <slrnldoh3g.n69.timmcn@sugaree.local>, Tim McNamara > > >>> <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > > >>>> On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 19:30:47 +1300, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Realistically, you're not going to stop adverts and there's absolutely > > >>>>> nothing to worry about ... unless you belong to the tin-foil hat > > >>>>> brigade, in which case the boogey man is coming to get you tonight, if > > >>>>> the little grey aliens don't get you first. > > >>>> > > >>>> Sadly the tinfoil hat brigade keeps getting proven to be correct... > > >>> > > >>> If you're seriously worried that you're being spied on and caught, then > > >>> it's likely that you shouldn't be doing whatever you're doing and > > >>> should be caught. > > >>> > > >>> It's extremely simple - if you're not doing anything wrong, then you > > >>> have nothing to worry about. > > >> > > >> What you're accused of doing can easily be fabricated through a > > >> selective presentation from enormous amounts of data. That has been > > >> proven quite often. > > > > > > If you seriously believe that anyone is interested enough in you to go > > > to all that bother, then you've got bigger problems that wearing a > > > tin-foil hat will ever solve. > > > > According to the New York Times, data from tracking is sold to > > credit-rating agencies, health insurers, and potential employers. It can > > also affect prices quoted to you by online shops. > > Yep, and there's a flock of levitating pink porcines going past my > window right now. :-\ Some places to set prices based on your browsing history. Airline companies are the worst offenders and they've been analyzed by journalists so you should be able to find references. Amazon.com does it too by choosing whether to show you a higher or lower priced seller of an item you're looking for. Unless you come in through an external link, you won't know that Amazon is even doing it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-21 16:34 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <210120141634076802%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #55108 |
In article <mcmurtrie-A367CC.16103720012014@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote: > > Some places to set prices based on your browsing history. Airline > companies are the worst offenders and they've been analyzed by > journalists so you should be able to find references. Amazon.com does > it too by choosing whether to show you a higher or lower priced seller > of an item you're looking for. Unless you come in through an external > link, you won't know that Amazon is even doing it. It's still not you personally. They simply don't have any personal information to sell to anyone else.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-20 23:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <52ddf946$0$46482$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #55131 |
On 14-01-20 22:34, Your Name wrote: > It's still not you personally. They simply don't have any personal > information to sell to anyone else. Just because they do not know your name does not mean they have no personal information on me. Say I searched for pink panties last night. Today, as I walk in front of Macy's, Google's goal is to send me an instant message offering me a discount on pink panties at Macy's. (geolocation triggers) Had I been looking for chainsaws, then Google would be sending me discount coupons for chainsaws at Macys. If you access a porn web site, you can expect porn ads on that web site. But once you leave the site and return to NYSE stock quotes, you do not want/expect your previous browsing hostory to taint the type of ads you are presented with on the NYSE web site.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-21 18:48 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <210120141848386005%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #55139 |
In article <52ddf946$0$46482$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-01-20 22:34, Your Name wrote: > > > > It's still not you personally. They simply don't have any personal > > information to sell to anyone else. > > Just because they do not know your name does not mean they have no > personal information on me. > > Say I searched for pink panties last night. Today, as I walk in front of > Macy's, Google's goal is to send me an instant message offering me a > discount on pink panties at Macy's. (geolocation triggers) > > Had I been looking for chainsaws, then Google would be sending me > discount coupons for chainsaws at Macys. Yes, if you gave the device to someone else to use, they would still get those same coupons. It isn't and cannot be "tracking" *you* personally. The point was someone said they sold personal details ... they don't because they can't, because they simply don't actually have any personal details to sell.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-21 00:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <210120140010322230%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #55131 |
In article <210120141634076802%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > > Some places to set prices based on your browsing history. Airline > > companies are the worst offenders and they've been analyzed by > > journalists so you should be able to find references. Amazon.com does > > it too by choosing whether to show you a higher or lower priced seller > > of an item you're looking for. Unless you come in through an external > > link, you won't know that Amazon is even doing it. > > It's still not you personally. They simply don't have any personal > information to sell to anyone else. of course they do. their entire business model is based on gathering and marketing personal data to advertisers. the more they know, the more effective the ads are and the more revenue they get. why do you think they bought nest? now they'll know how much people spend on fuel costs every year.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-21 00:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <52de0c35$0$2836$c3e8da3$66d3cc2f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #55142 |
On 14-01-21 00:10, nospam wrote: > why do you think they bought nest? now they'll know how much people > spend on fuel costs every year. And their work/hours by looking at the programming of the thermostat to see at what time they come home at night (temperature increase) and what time they leave in morning, or if they stay at home all day.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 03:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <52db8ee4$0$46346$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #54945 |
On 14-01-19 00:50, John McWilliams wrote: > Well, not terribly insidiously, but I am getting targeted ads for a > chain hotel I stayed at a week or two ago. The NSA is following your every move, turn off your computer, phone, mobile phone and go live in a cabin in a remote valley in Alaska. And hurry up, the men in black are on their way to your location. They know where you live :-) Turning off 3rd party cookies doesn't really work for ads. Ads are often displayed in their own frame (iframe) and as such, as the url of that iframe belongs to the ad agency like google, it can set its own cookies. And the url contains post data that comes from the main web site which sets the tone for type of ad you are likely to get. In some cases, ads are auctioned "live". google presents your profile to advertisers and the one who bids the most to get their ads presented gets it.If your profile shows that you researched hotels recently, then hotel chains may be interested in you and bid to have their ads targetted at you. You can delete all ad agency related cookies if you want. But before long they will have rebuilt a new profile on you and you'll get targetted ads.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 20:25 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <do_ray_me-497350.20254019012014@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #54945 |
In article <lbfp2i$lc6$1@dont-email.me>, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote: > Well, not terribly insidiously, but I am getting targeted ads for a > chain hotel I stayed at a week or two ago. I had to agree to their > terms, which of course I didn't read, but now on any web page, it seems, > their ad is inserted somewhere on the page. > > Is it a matter of a cookie? I'd like to get rid of their ad. How are > they able to put an ad in on numerous web pages now that I am home? Can > they search the web for my MAC address and hit me up that way? You can block cookies from third parties and advertisers under the Privacy tab of Safari prefs. I do. You can also see the stored cookies via the same pref. You an also limit website access to location services in various ways. I have it prompting for each website once each day. -- dorayme
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Davoud <star@sky.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-19 14:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <190120141420232038%star@sky.net> |
| In reply to | #54950 |
dorayme : > You can block cookies from third parties and advertisers under the > Privacy tab of Safari prefs. I do. You can also see the stored cookies > via the same pref. You an also limit website access to location > services in various ways. I have it prompting for each website once > each day. Yes, I do that. And I use "Cookie" (App Store) to remove tracking cookies, clear caches, and the like. I don't see where it helps much. I still see targeted ads. I look at a hotel rate in a certain city. I clear tracking cookies and other extraneous junk immediately. Before long I am seeing ads for that hotel, attractions in that city, air fare, &c. The cookies act instantaneously; persistence seems not to matter. I know that NSA is not interested in me. I also know that the commercial world works hard to probe my personal habits in order to extract money from me. Sometimes they succeed, and that's good enough for them. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web