Never considered the Google/Adsense aspect. I agree with you completely. I don't think people realize what type of information is being saved about them. And honestly, how can you expect them to if they don't understand what happens behind the scenes of a website?
Hashim Warren
· 2 years ago
Even worse, your ISP knows about every single site you visit, and they actively sell that information to web measurement companies like Quantcast.
FaceWeek.com
· 2 years ago
Government will have to introduce some kinds of privacy regulations in general - these companies like Facebook and Google are gaining too much information on us - as does Microsoft.
theharmonyguy
· 2 years ago
You're that this isn't a new practice, Facebook is just using it in a new (and more obvious) way. (Except it does remind me of the days when I'd see Amazon ads on other sites that would greet me by name.)
Still, it's not hard to avoid - I've been blocking third-party cookies for several years, a common browser setting. Most modern browsers also allow URL-based content filtering, which can target services like Google AdSense. There are certainly ethical issues involved here, but options exist.
In any case, I was a bit surprised by Nate's reaction: "Unfortunately, it’s being done in a ‘you can opt-out’ manner, when it should be ‘you can opt-in’." And why should Facebook offer you their service with zero compensation from you? I can understand people's reluctance about the new system, but at the same time, Facebook is a business and their service costs them money. They have to pay the bills somehow.
Chris Kennedy
· 2 years ago
A few points:
1. I think you mean AdSense, not AdWords.
2. Users can opt-out of tracking through a combination of behavior (don't use Google, et al.) and technology (browser settings, plugins, anonymizers, etc.).
3. To the extent that consumers want to avoid being tracked, there is a business opportunity for supplying such a service. But for it to become pervasive it will have to provide benefits that outweigh the personalization and targeting opportunities supplied by tracking.
4. As I said in my last comment, users can easily opt-out of Beacons.
What would a privacy bill of rights entail? Do you really think a political solution is a better tactic than a technical or behavioral solution?
bernie
· 2 years ago
The difference is that Google doesn't need an uproar to change its policies:
Notice that Google is doing a lot things that aren't in its best interest with that statement. It is going against the grain of what other businesses are doing. Facebook seems to go in the exact opposite direction.
I think both sites pose privacy risks, but Facebook is a bigger threat because it has no other way to really make money, or continue existing. That makes it more desperate. That makes it more dangerous.
All Comments
Still, it's not hard to avoid - I've been blocking third-party cookies for several years, a common browser setting. Most modern browsers also allow URL-based content filtering, which can target services like Google AdSense. There are certainly ethical issues involved here, but options exist.
In any case, I was a bit surprised by Nate's reaction: "Unfortunately, it’s being done in a ‘you can opt-out’ manner, when it should be ‘you can opt-in’." And why should Facebook offer you their service with zero compensation from you? I can understand people's reluctance about the new system, but at the same time, Facebook is a business and their service costs them money. They have to pay the bills somehow.
1. I think you mean AdSense, not AdWords.
2. Users can opt-out of tracking through a combination of behavior (don't use Google, et al.) and technology (browser settings, plugins, anonymizers, etc.).
3. To the extent that consumers want to avoid being tracked, there is a business opportunity for supplying such a service. But for it to become pervasive it will have to provide benefits that outweigh the personalization and targeting opportunities supplied by tracking.
4. As I said in my last comment, users can easily opt-out of Beacons.
What would a privacy bill of rights entail? Do you really think a political solution is a better tactic than a technical or behavioral solution?
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/g...
Notice that Google is doing a lot things that aren't in its best interest with that statement. It is going against the grain of what other businesses are doing. Facebook seems to go in the exact opposite direction.
I think both sites pose privacy risks, but Facebook is a bigger threat because it has no other way to really make money, or continue existing. That makes it more desperate. That makes it more dangerous.