Slashdot Mirror


Consumer Groups Advocate for 'Do Not Track' Registry

eldavojohn writes "Consumer groups are asking for a 'do not track' registry to be implemented, similar to the successful and popular 'do not call' registry. Tracking companies are asking for examples where tracking has caused harm, and would rather the industry stay self-regulated. 'In December, the FTC approved Google's purchase of advertising rival DoubleClick over the objections of some privacy groups. At the same time, the agency urged advertisers to let computer users bar advertisers from collecting information on them, to provide "reasonable security" for any data and to collect data on health conditions or other sensitive issues only with the consumer's express consent.'"

7 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Nice Try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    something like this would be impossible to enforce, and the data collection is almost always transparent to the user.

    but if you really dont want to be tracked, just turn off your cookies! (although there are ways to track without using them)

  2. Re:What's with all these registries? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're going to see the ads anyway, why not see ads targeted towards products you're interested in?

    I don't care if Google knows what websites I visit. Oooo! A single 29-year-old male goes to porn sites!! How EEEEEVIL of Google to know this!

  3. How do you "not track" by nine-times · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm probably not fully understanding, but how do you track people, but allow someone to "opt out". What I mean is, let's say you don't want DoubleClick to track you. So for them to abide by a "do not track" list, they need to set up some kind of identifier so that, when you visit a site where they would normally track you, they recognize it's you and stop tracking you. But that means you'd have to send them that identifier in every instance where they would track you, and they'd end up having to track you to make sure they don't track you.

    I suppose they could just not store the collecting information, though. And no, I didn't RTFA.

    1. Re:How do you "not track" by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I'm against picketing but I don't know how to show it" -Mitch Hedberg

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  4. Wouldn't it be smarter to just block the ads? by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wouldn't it be smarter to just block the ads instead? To prevent such cookies from touching one's computer?

  5. Re:No, I'm not going to see the ads. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gruh, I should have specifically said "no 'I use AdBlock' responses." Yes, we get it, a lot of Slashdot readers use AdBlock. I understand this. I've read the snarky "the web has ads? I use AdBlock so I don't see them" about 50,000 times this month alone! Yes, I know it exists. Yes, I know people use it. Yes, I choose not to as a way of supporting the sites I visit. No, you won't convince me to download it.

    Sorry, those posts are irritating as hell. Please try to respond with original thoughts. Thank you.

  6. Re:What's with all these registries? by beckerist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just what I want. A database with my personal information that people can access to see if the personal information they already have should be used... How would this be policed world wide? What would stop someone who is already breaking 500 laws from ripping THAT info and using it? At the very least they would have to provide SOME sort of validation, and that alone scares me.