unless you actually visit the site (and provide private information like a name), the advertiser doesn't get that sales lead.
That's not relevant. Whether or not a sales lead is generated has no impact on these issues.
Your IP address is not what is used for this, the cookie is, and that cookie is married to the ad network.
That's right (especially if you expand the definition of "cookie" to include their stronger forms). I'm pretty sure that most people here understand that.
Why does that make the situation more acceptable?
nothing can be hidden in them that you can't decode. You can also erase them incredibly easy.
They usually just contain some sort of tracking ID, so you can see them -- but they're meaningless to you.
Erasing them is easy. Getting rid of them is hard, when you take into account supercookies and beacons.
Unless you are doing criminal activity, eg pirating movies, you should not be concerned by the average ad, because a lot of the individual data isn't stored, only aggregate data on a much macro level.
If no individual data is stored, then whether or not you're doing something illegal doesn't enter into it. So why did you mention it? Besides, this isn't about hiding nefarious deeds.
Also, the whole "aggregation" thing doesn't make everything OK at all. Perhaps what you're not understanding is that your opinion of what we should or should not be OK with isn't incredibly relevant.
The only thing that's relevant is what we decide for ourselves. If I don't want to be tracked, I shouldn't be. The reasons why don't matter at all.
Malware is an important reason, but for me, tracking is the #1 reason. The #2 reason is because so much of the web is functionally unusable if you aren't blocking ads.
This is the "forgotten" reason why people run ad-blockers: to nix the tracking data across websites!
This is the primary reason that I block all the advertising agencies that I can. I'm not allergic to seeing a reasonable number of respectful ads. However, I 100% don't want the tracking that advertising brings.
This is why all the industry efforts to make ads "acceptable" are worthless to me -- all of those plans think that tracking is not a problem.
Not if they want the ad to actually work. The standard rule of thumb is that you have to be exposed to an ad about seven times before it affects behavior enough to matter.
the ad reminds you to tell him you just bought one and it was an awesome product
If I see an obviously targeted ad, it reminds me to never buy products from that company again. I certainly won't be recommending it, even if it's the best thing ever.
Also, as a bonus, I think we just figured out how to get women back in the tech industry:
Maybe this explains why I've not personally experienced a lack of women at the places I've worked. Of the last three companies, the one with the fewest women engineers had about 1/3 women.
But I am extremely picky about where I work. If I get a hint of poor management, or I disagree with their engineering approach, I pass.
As I said earlier, if you can't do a real evaluation, the best practice is to wait a couple of weeks before applying the update and then search the internet to see if anyone has had problems. That's not so good for finding security issues, but it's decent for determining if the update is going to break things.
I understand, so do you believe that anything more than a static HTML file should instead be an application written for the users specific operating system/version?
Not necessarily. It entirely depends on what market the developer is intending to address. My personal preference leans very strongly away from web-based apps, but that just means I'm not the target market for such apps.
I don't see a Gmail application for Windows nor macOS, am I not looking in the right place?
I'm not sure I understand your question. I was referring to the GMail web app, not to some kind of native GMail application. I'm not aware of any such thing, except for on mobile devices.
But GMail is, in my opinion, inferior to the better native email clients I've used -- but there aren't as many of those as there used to be. I currently use Thunderbird on my desktops and the GMail app on my phone. I also run my own mailserver, and use Roundcube to provide webmail access, just in case I'm without both my desktops and my phone.
Absolutely right, but I was talking specifically about people holding software engineering positions.
"Move fast and break things" started as the engineering motto at Facebook (thanks, Zuck). Unfortunately, there's a whole bunch of people who still think that sounds great.
Maybe so, but how much more does an automatic transmission weigh versus a manual transmission? Does it make a significant difference, particularly taking into account the better mileage you get from the more efficient shifting of an automatic?
Yes, the setup is very easy and intuitive to use, with one exception: if you want to plug a USB stick into it to play media from, a non-technical person would probably need a little bit of guidance -- but not much. I could fix that, but it's not worth it to me.
As far as pricing goes, I stand corrected. My setup cost me (excluding the value of my time), right around $400 altogether.
No competent engineer, new or old, has ever uttered those words or advocated what they represent.
I completely agree. However, it's a sentiment that I hear quite commonly these days, usually from people in software engineering positions who are in their 20s.
Just because I accidentally dropped a 't' doesn't mean that I wasn't intending "cachet". That's some prime pedantry, right there. As a fellow pedant, I salut you!
Apparently so! The number and type of questions can vary from store to store (or even in the same store from week to week). When I used one this afternoon, I was asked (excluding the questions required for the transaction) if I had a loyalty card and if I wanted to make a charitable donation. I think the most non-relevant questions I got in one go was four.
It wouldn't be as bad if the process was consistent, so I could learn the proper sequence. But it's not, so I have to actually wait and read every screen that comes up to make sure I'm done.
Slashdot Mirror
How does this guy get anything done?
You are correct, and every major software company is very aware of that. Most of them, though, just let it happen.
If you visit Site A, Site A has your browsing history of Site A. They're free to share that information with who ever they please.
That's a big part of the problem, right there. They shouldn't be free to share that information with whoever they please.
First, people are a little too paranoid.
How so?
unless you actually visit the site (and provide private information like a name), the advertiser doesn't get that sales lead.
That's not relevant. Whether or not a sales lead is generated has no impact on these issues.
Your IP address is not what is used for this, the cookie is, and that cookie is married to the ad network.
That's right (especially if you expand the definition of "cookie" to include their stronger forms). I'm pretty sure that most people here understand that.
Why does that make the situation more acceptable?
nothing can be hidden in them that you can't decode. You can also erase them incredibly easy.
They usually just contain some sort of tracking ID, so you can see them -- but they're meaningless to you.
Erasing them is easy. Getting rid of them is hard, when you take into account supercookies and beacons.
Unless you are doing criminal activity, eg pirating movies, you should not be concerned by the average ad, because a lot of the individual data isn't stored, only aggregate data on a much macro level.
If no individual data is stored, then whether or not you're doing something illegal doesn't enter into it. So why did you mention it? Besides, this isn't about hiding nefarious deeds.
Also, the whole "aggregation" thing doesn't make everything OK at all. Perhaps what you're not understanding is that your opinion of what we should or should not be OK with isn't incredibly relevant.
The only thing that's relevant is what we decide for ourselves. If I don't want to be tracked, I shouldn't be. The reasons why don't matter at all.
The measures you must take increasingly break web sites
This doesn't happen as much as it used to, in my experience. But if my countermeasures make a website nonfunctional, I simply don't use that website.
There are only three sites that I can think of that are actually essential to me, and none of them break because of my countermeasures.
What if the ad sites are being told by the site you visit that you are visiting, and they make an educated guess as to the kinds of ads to run?
I have exactly zero problems with that.
Malware is an important reason, but for me, tracking is the #1 reason. The #2 reason is because so much of the web is functionally unusable if you aren't blocking ads.
This is the "forgotten" reason why people run ad-blockers: to nix the tracking data across websites!
This is the primary reason that I block all the advertising agencies that I can. I'm not allergic to seeing a reasonable number of respectful ads. However, I 100% don't want the tracking that advertising brings.
This is why all the industry efforts to make ads "acceptable" are worthless to me -- all of those plans think that tracking is not a problem.
they only need to win once.
Not if they want the ad to actually work. The standard rule of thumb is that you have to be exposed to an ad about seven times before it affects behavior enough to matter.
the ad reminds you to tell him you just bought one and it was an awesome product
If I see an obviously targeted ad, it reminds me to never buy products from that company again. I certainly won't be recommending it, even if it's the best thing ever.
You're mostly correct. You're also stating stuff that almost everybody on /. already knows.
It depends on how strong your countermeasures are. But it's a safe bet that, even with very strong defenses, some advertisers will see some of it.
Nope
the people in charge of things like this aren't as petty as Slashdot crybabies and are too focused on getting the job done
Wait, so expecting ethical behavior from your partners, and strenuously insisting that your systems are secure counts as being "crybabies" now?
you get up with fleas.
Also, as a bonus, I think we just figured out how to get women back in the tech industry:
Maybe this explains why I've not personally experienced a lack of women at the places I've worked. Of the last three companies, the one with the fewest women engineers had about 1/3 women.
But I am extremely picky about where I work. If I get a hint of poor management, or I disagree with their engineering approach, I pass.
It may be an inconvenience but I think we can live without a tv for a few days or a week or two
Well, certainly, but why even suffer that inconvenience when you don't have to?
As I said earlier, if you can't do a real evaluation, the best practice is to wait a couple of weeks before applying the update and then search the internet to see if anyone has had problems. That's not so good for finding security issues, but it's decent for determining if the update is going to break things.
I understand, so do you believe that anything more than a static HTML file should instead be an application written for the users specific operating system/version?
Not necessarily. It entirely depends on what market the developer is intending to address. My personal preference leans very strongly away from web-based apps, but that just means I'm not the target market for such apps.
I don't see a Gmail application for Windows nor macOS, am I not looking in the right place?
I'm not sure I understand your question. I was referring to the GMail web app, not to some kind of native GMail application. I'm not aware of any such thing, except for on mobile devices.
But GMail is, in my opinion, inferior to the better native email clients I've used -- but there aren't as many of those as there used to be. I currently use Thunderbird on my desktops and the GMail app on my phone. I also run my own mailserver, and use Roundcube to provide webmail access, just in case I'm without both my desktops and my phone.
Absolutely right, but I was talking specifically about people holding software engineering positions.
"Move fast and break things" started as the engineering motto at Facebook (thanks, Zuck). Unfortunately, there's a whole bunch of people who still think that sounds great.
Maybe so, but how much more does an automatic transmission weigh versus a manual transmission? Does it make a significant difference, particularly taking into account the better mileage you get from the more efficient shifting of an automatic?
Yes, the setup is very easy and intuitive to use, with one exception: if you want to plug a USB stick into it to play media from, a non-technical person would probably need a little bit of guidance -- but not much. I could fix that, but it's not worth it to me.
As far as pricing goes, I stand corrected. My setup cost me (excluding the value of my time), right around $400 altogether.
No competent engineer, new or old, has ever uttered those words or advocated what they represent.
I completely agree. However, it's a sentiment that I hear quite commonly these days, usually from people in software engineering positions who are in their 20s.
Just because I accidentally dropped a 't' doesn't mean that I wasn't intending "cachet". That's some prime pedantry, right there. As a fellow pedant, I salut you!
Apparently so! The number and type of questions can vary from store to store (or even in the same store from week to week). When I used one this afternoon, I was asked (excluding the questions required for the transaction) if I had a loyalty card and if I wanted to make a charitable donation. I think the most non-relevant questions I got in one go was four.
It wouldn't be as bad if the process was consistent, so I could learn the proper sequence. But it's not, so I have to actually wait and read every screen that comes up to make sure I'm done.