Slashdot Mirror
Privacy Groups Want Feds To Investigate Targeted Ads
ciscoguy01 tips news that three privacy groups are asking the US Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether ad networks are "unfairly tracking Americans and profiting from their data." According to Wired,
"Companies named in the complaint (PDF) include Google, Yahoo, PubMatic, TARGUSinfo, MediaMath, eXelate, Rubicon Project, AppNexus, and Rocket Fuel. At issue is a growing market of targeted, real-time ads, where advertisers can choose to show ads to people based on their age, gender, income and location — as well as their recent online behavior — often on unrelated sites that let third parties track users.... Third-party cookie tracking isn't new, but as the complaint points out, marketers are increasingly trying to augment that data with other data sets, such as the social network data that Rapleaf harvests and resells.... Tying ad cookies to personally identifiable data would let marketers successfully combine online and offline data on website visitors to build a complete digital dossier on a user."
The government will allow the private sector to do what it is politically unable to do itself. Once enough data is collected, the state can access it under National Security Letters when it needs to. All this without the political and legal consequences of the state operating the system itself.
... but is this part of the price we pay for free websites?
AFA harvesting data from social networking sites, well, if you're willing to post every detail of your life you can't be surprised if someone, or some company, is willing to suck up that data. It doesn't make it right, but I find it hard to feel sorry for people who want their lives to be a "web based reality show" for their friends but don't want anyone to actually use that information (either for marketing or for passing judgement on their character when it comes to employment, etc).
What are these ads of which you speak?
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
As for whether the FTC will investigate, it’s hard to say — but it’s not too likely. The complaint doesn’t seem to allege any clear-cut violations of law
It is Sunday. Go mow the lawn and enjoy a beer afterwards, or write some code. The world will survive this for now.
Two weeks ago it was Theora, last week was Flash, this week it's cookies?
Man, it's hard to keep up with teh evils of teh intarwebs!
Just introduce the rule that any customer contacted by a company may force them to provide a complete record (sent in paper, with a personal valid signature of the person in charge) on his personal data and how they got it, and the right to demand deletion of his record and the restriction a not use the same way again. Wrong statements should be punished by hefty fines and prison for the person signing it.
if 5% of the people do it this would clog up the system pretty much.
Somebody's tracking me on the Intertubes! Oh-noes.
Privoxy FTW. I wish the marketdroids the best of luck in trying to cherry-pick whatever obnoxious ad they wish to throw in front of my eyes. I find blatant advertising as obnoxious as the next person, but I find it somewhat difficult to get excited over something that I'll never see.
So what if some database somewhere says that I enjoy midget w... uh, whatever. If someone's bothered by the existence of some database entry which besides its actual existence carries no other impact, then here's what they should do: now that summer is here and the weather is nicer (in my hemisphere, at least), is to go outside, fire up the grill, and enjoy a good barbecue. Life's too short.
With a Tivo for the boob tube, and privoxy for the Intertubes, I enjoy a generally ad-free existence. I've come to the conclusion that the best way to fight obnoxious and invasive advertising is via technical means. You can't legislate it away, any more than you can legislate away rudeness. These privacy groups may have good intentions, but I think it's a waste of time. I am skeptical that the legal route will accomplish anything. What they should be doing, instead, is educating people and promoting ways for them to filter out obnoxious advertising and solicitations out of their daily lives.
If this were a court rather than the FTC, it's be a textbook case of "dismissed based on failure to state a claim". May as well sue Ford for "profiting from selling ground transportation".
Never trust anyone who thinks that "life is unfair" is right and proper.
Ok everyone, so we know now, Steve Job's Slashdot id is Uzik2.
when I received totally non-nonsensical adds for feminine hygiene products (I'm a man), dating services (I'm married...in the traditional sense), and other products I don't care about! This whole only having to see adds that I could possibly be interested in is way too much! BTW: Yes I get that the point is about privacy, but seriously, privacy is a fairly recent invention in human history that only is a convenience for the wicked or helps validate the prejudices of the ignorant. The truth is that privacy, although attractive to our weaker side, is an illusion and not truly a fundamental right.
If I have to view ads I'd much rather view something that I may have interest in rather than all those god awful "whiter teeth" or "perfect abs" ads featuring some man/woman's fat gut on a website.
Targeted ads don't necessarily have to know who I am. They can work with the context of the website and the page's content. Is that really a bad thing?
Either way, if targeted ads mean fewer pay walls then bring it on. I *much* rather have tracking cookies (that I can delete) in my browser than have my payment details on dozens of sites.
If "fair" means that the clowns who slacked off in school, spending their time partying and doing drugs, now make little more than minimum wage while those of us who worked hard make a good living, then I'm all for "fair". Too often, those who tout "fair" do not consider that one's current situation is heavily affected by one's previous decisions. I feel no moral responsibility to compensate for the problems you have caused yourself.
linquendum tondere
I prefer being bombarded by ads that I find relevant to my "profile". So here you go Google, in case you didn't figured it out already: I'm 35, male, based in Montreal, income 100k, 6', 130 pounds, happily married. No, I'm have zero interest in loosing weight, buying an endless swimming pool, or a fake Rolex.
The problem isn't that privacy is a recent invention, it's that technology has made it much harder to come by. Back in the day privacy was automatic, as there was no other way it could be. This was due primarily to geographical considerations and the effort required to get information from one location to another. Once there, the "processing" of said information was another matter entirely. This wall no longer exists - acquiring information - in terms of both its scope and detail - is relatively effortless. Further, it can be disseminated almost instantaneously - to just about anywhere.
LOL! Extra points for you!
-- Programming with boost is like building a house with lego. It's a cool but I wouldn't want to live in it
Fairness isn't the issue, legality is, and since you voluntarily give up the data, i think they are well within legal bounds.
Life in general isn't 'fair', so get over it and don't drop so many breadcrumbs.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Too often clowns who work no harder than anyone else think they have done something special because they are not on minimum wages. In other words; "They call it the american dream because you have to be asleep to believe it" - Carlin.
First of all my penis is of adequate size! Secondly, I am not looking for casual sex. And Lastly, I am not Black! Not that there is anything wrong with that.... Thou I find it funny that they can think I have a small penis at the same time they think I am black.