Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Advertisers are Watching You

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the zip-it-up-buddy dept.

pcause noted that the New York Times is running a story about the information being collected about you by internet advertisers. Of course much of this is not news to you, but it's important that the mainstream media is more aware of the issues surrounding this.

31 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. You may be surprised who is involved by Spritzer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sounds like the 4th largest bank in the U.S. exposing me to no less than 12 single pixel tracking images from the likes of doubleclick, ru4, advertising.com etc. when I want to login followed by tracking by an outside source while using the "secure" area of the site(hooray for AdBlock). I complained and complained. I finally received a response from the office of CEO Ken Thompson telling me to piss up a rope. I am no longer a customer.

    1. Re:You may be surprised who is involved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Soviet Russia you watch the advertisers! Wait, that doesn't sound quite right...

    2. Re:You may be surprised who is involved by Spritzer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, it was a real letter of all things. Maybe I should scan it and post it when I get home.

    3. Re:You may be surprised who is involved by Spritzer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What was fun was watching the look on the branch manager's face when I explained why I was closing my accounts. After I showed him the letter (he was shocked) he asked me to show him what I was talking about. I had him open the page source and find the huge section "" filled with tracking links. Again, he was shocked. He said, "I sure am glad I work here and can do my banking any time I want. This is crazy."

      Of course, CEO/Chairman/President Thompson believes it to be a secure, nonintrusive essential part of their business model.

  2. Mainstrem media attention not "important" or good by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It's not good news that the mainstream media has picked it up, because they just use if for a lot of sensationalist fear-mongering that only serves to scare the uninformed public even more. I was watching CSPAN this morning and they were talking about this. People were calling in who obviously had no clue about the internet saying things like "My wife refuses to buy anything online because of stuff like this" and talking out of their asses.

    Stuff like this doesn't really inform the general public, it only frightens them and makes them even more irrational. It's like the occassional story about the kidnapped kid or terrorist attack that causes everyone to freak out and start demanding irrational laws.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  3. That may be... by Alien+Being · · Score: 3, Funny

    But i'm not watching them. Thanks Adblock!

    1. Re:That may be... by gnick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Thanks Adblock! I also use Adblock (I'm sure that a lot of this audience does), but try to use it responsibly. If you completely Adblock pages that you like that rely largely in ad revenue to stay afloat, you are ensuring that the level of service will degrade or that other (possibly more invasive) methods of generating revenue will be implemented. For sites you want to keep going (e.g. slashdot), especially ones with well-targeted ads, remember the white-list option.

      Every time you Adblock slashdot, the gods flip a bit on your hard drive.
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:That may be... by notque · · Score: 2, Informative

      I disagree. Screw all advertising. It's intention is to delude you into purchasing something on issues aside from the products qualities.

      Advertising is intended to lie to me. I refuse to spend time listening to known liars.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    3. Re:That may be... by Mox-Dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I use adblock, too, and in the time before I did, I *never* clicked on an online ad. Not once. Nor can I imagine a situation in which I would. ever. So why shouldn't I adblock not only slashdot, but every website?

    4. Re:That may be... by gnick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So why shouldn't I adblock not only slashdot, but every website? I don't recall ever clicking an ad either but, if I blindly speculate correctly, some ad-revenue is generated based on targeted viewing rather than purely click-through.

      Feel free to correct me if anyone has actual knowledge/data. I reject the argument that white-listing is stupid because advertisers suck - I know they do but, if they pay sites I like to provide content to me without forcing me to subscribe, I'll put up with them. But, if white-listing slashdot (et al.) really does not help them at all, then I'll clean out my white-list.
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re:That may be... by gnick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's intention is to delude you into purchasing something on issues aside from the products qualities. I feel filthy standing up for advertisers - Ads have become a blemish on the planet and I'm sick of being attacked in every possible venue by random images telling me that I need random things. In fact, I'm of the opinion that prescription drug ads should be illegal.

      However, I still think it's a little inaccurate to say that all ads are trying to get you to buy something based "on issues aside from the products qualities". That's often true - Fear-mongering / Band-wagon attacks / etc are common. But ads do exist that do nothing more than try to make you aware of a product's qualities rather than trying to delude you.

      I'm not saying, I'm just saying...
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    6. Re:That may be... by misleb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I also use Adblock (I'm sure that a lot of this audience does), but try to use it responsibly. If you completely Adblock pages that you like that rely largely in ad revenue to stay afloat, you are ensuring that the level of service will degrade or that other (possibly more invasive) methods of generating revenue will be implemented. For sites you want to keep going (e.g. slashdot), especially ones with well-targeted ads, remember the white-list option.


      I still don't get the supposed benefit of "well-targeted" ads. Every time I hear that phrase I think of the book/movie Minority Report.

      As for sites like slashdot shutting down... meh. I like slashdot and all, but quite frankly, if it went under because a few people who don't like to see ads block them, then so be it. There was an internet before massive amounts of advertising. There will continue to be an internet with massive amounts of ad blocking. If they invent more invasive methods, we'll block those too and you suckers who feel morally obligated to look at them will just have to suck it up.

      -matthew
      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    7. Re:That may be... by srh2o · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You do what you want... but don't try to tell me that I'm not using Adblock "responsibly" The advertisers had their chance with me. What I got was pop-overs, pop-unders, drive by installs and more impressions of X10 cameras than I will ever care about. I got ads that blocked the content, that played loud sounds, that floated all over the page. Adblock is a response to irresponsible behavior by the advertisers. I use it and I use it on full. There was content before the ads and there will be content after the ads. There won't be subscriptions, because that is the kiss of death for a content provider on the internet. But by all means go ahead and whitelist if you wish. As for me I'm done with the constant barrage of ads. 90% of them are from spammy, sketchy vendors that I would never buy from anyway.

      Sites that want to make ad revenue work need to rethink their usage and their suppliers. Ads can be successful and desirable. If you doubt that take a look at the average Sunday paper. I purchase that each Sunday and pay more for it BECAUSE of the ads. Talk about a successful model. Content providers are going to need to provide something more than your second hand guilt argument to get me to turn off Adblock and they have no one to blame but themselves.

    8. Re:That may be... by Mox-Dragon · · Score: 2, Funny

      I do believe that WE are providing the majority of content for Slashdot.


      Seriously. I've been waiting for a check for like, five years now. All of those adblocking slashdot readers must be interfering with my revenue stream.
    9. Re:That may be... by street+struttin' · · Score: 2, Funny

      Advertising is intended to lie to me. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines. And movies. And at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts and written on the sky. But not in dreams. No siree!
    10. Re:That may be... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The difference is that Slashdot doesn't have "massive amounts of advertising". The front page has exactly 1 ad on each page. If that's too much for you, then fine. But I find it to be unobtrusive, and a very good way at generating cash. People are probably far more likely to remember and click on an ad, when they only see a single advertisement.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  4. I see dead ads by Nomen+Publicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they are watching, why is it that I never see any "targeted" adverts? TV can be excused for just throwing everything into the aether and hoping that something sticks, but on the web why do I see all kinds of ads in which I have no interest in at all?

    1. Re:I see dead ads by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 2, Funny

      How dare you question the advertising executives?!? They know what you need regardless of whether you think you need it or not, and you will be served those ads!

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:I see dead ads by edwardpickman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you sure? Do you think you get all those Viagra and big dick ads by accident?

  5. Re:Get it over with... by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe the point is that if everyone used adblock we would't worry ourselves with discussions about online advertising?

  6. Re:Mainstrem media attention not "important" or go by gnick · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My wife refuses to buy anything online because of stuff like this We can't even get our secretary to order things online using the company card - We have to go to another group's purchaser if we want to use a vendor that won't accept phone orders.

    At the risk of straying off-topic, I'd like to see a "mainstream media" story about the different security risks/exposures between internet purchases, phone purchases, and in-store purchases. Tracking behavior is certainly easier online, but cutting people out of the loop does good things for security. Although imperfect, I trust automated billing a lot more than inmates working phone banks or high-schoolers swiping cards at their summer employment and throwing away paper receipts.
    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  7. Advertisers Are Watching Me? by flyneye · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Advertisers Are Watching Me?
            And yet I am not watching them as they present no more significance than a sparrow watching me and inspire no more interest than a slug.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  8. Privacy is the next killer ap by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The person who makes privacy as easy and intuitive as Google search will make a bundle. The public isn't ready yet, but when the time comes, the market for privacy will be huge.

    1. Re:Privacy is the next killer ap by gsslay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well in the mean time; do this;

        - use Firefox.
        - use Adblock. Constantly update it. Mercilessly add all sites that push annoying, irrelevant ads onto your screen.
        - regularly clear your cookies. Block any cookie forever from any website you don't immediately recognise.
        - use NoScript. Honestly, you'll be amazed by the source of all the scripts that attempt to run on your computer. How many of them do you care about?
        - lie on every stupid compulsory registration you encounter. If you have no immediate interest in entering a business arrangement with them, they often have no legitimate reason for demanding you answer these intrusive questions. Lie. Tell them you're a 80 year old widow from Vietnam (always good, they don't appear to be able to verify Zip/Post codes) with an interest in snowboards. That'll look good on their graphs. Tell the next website a completely different story.

  9. Re:Mainstrem media attention not "important" or go by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Informative
    "My wife refuses to buy anything online because of stuff like this" and talking out of their asses.


    Yet, I can almost guarantee these are the same people who have no problem with the government wiretapping their phones without a warrant, or having a National ID card or any of the other means of tracking and doing away with ones privacy that this administration (and others) have come up with all the name of supposed "security". After all, if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn't worry about the government tracking you or listening in on your phone calls.

    So yes, these people are talking out their asses but that doesn't mean the media attention is a bad thing. If it gets people to be more aware of their online privacy, and privacy in general, then this will have been a good thing.

    Besides, the easiest way to combat this is to get Firefox or other non-Microsoft browser, and have them auto-delete your cookies and cache every time you close the browser. Problem solved. The advertisers can bite my shiny metal ass if it screws up their ability track and categorize how many people revisit sites. To them, I'm always a new user.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  10. Re:Mainstrem media attention not "important" or go by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 2, Informative

    Stuff like this doesn't really inform the general public, it only frightens them and makes them even more irrational. It's like the occassional story about the kidnapped kid or terrorist attack that causes everyone to freak out and start demanding irrational laws.


    I agree it's not a case for more stupid laws, but it needs to be said, to be brought out into the light. The truth is that online advertisers do everything they can to track people online. How many of the regular people are aware of it? Even nerds can miss out. How many of you, faithful Slashdot readers, know about the so called "Flash cookies" and how you're probably being tracked with them right now? Or other insidious tracking methods?

    From a tehnical point of view it's easy to dismiss things. They have simple explanations. Browsers should come by default configured with high privacy options. When you install an external browser plugin it's common sense that the plugin may do whatever it pleases. Let's use AdBlock. But these are in no way obvious things for 90% of Internet users. And if someone is watching them wherever they go online I think they should know and learn how to protect themselves.
    --
    i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
  11. Use a tracker filter by the_other_chewey · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a special filter subscription for Adblock Plus to kill a lot of that tracking
    stuff (webbugs, tracking scripts, etc.), the "ABP Tracking Filter" (see #3 on the left).

    This of course doesn't make you anonymous online at all, but it helps against the worst
    offenders and keeps your data out of their DBs.

    (Full disclosure: I am a co-author of that list)

  12. Re:Cookies by mlts · · Score: 4, Informative

    One thing that people don't clear as often as cookies is the Flash Shared Object repository. A lot of advertisers use this to store persistent user data in lieu of cookies to monitor viewer activities.

    I personally use two ways to block this. First is NoScript which is a must have companion to Adblock. Adblock stops the known stuff, NoScript stops the unknown stuff.

    Second, on Windows, I deleted the Flash Player folder in Documents and Settings\username\Application Data\Macromedia, and created a text file with the exact same name as the folder. This makes the Flash player unable to write any persistent data to disk. However, this does sometimes mess up sites like YouTube which store legit preferences.

    Third, I run a utility called ccleaner (used to be called Crap Cleaner) which is great for removing random junk left over in Windows apps.

    This is not perfect, but good for most sites. If you want better security, consider running your Web browser in a VM that dumps all changes since a known good snapshot. I do this for some entertainment Flash sites because I don't feel like allowing, even temporarily, all the data mining companies write access to my machine.

  13. Re:Mainstrem media attention not "important" or go by PReDiToR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How can we educate the general public into being able to raise their voices against something like Phorm without scaring the crap out of them?

    Once you know that every character in your page request has been sent through an adware service, you kinda lose control of your bowels ...

    --

    Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
  14. Re:Mainstrem media attention not "important" or go by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2, Informative

    Replying to self:

    It seems you are right. I'm not surprised as this kind of cynical lying, but it really is sad nonetheless.

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080309-bad-phorm-uk-isps-to-sell-clickstream-data-to-advertisers.html
    http://www.badphorm.co.uk/

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  15. Here is the letter by Spritzer · · Score: 2, Informative

    ENJOY!