Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
If we change the laws to prevent tracking, Im not convinced this will result in a doomsday scenario.
First, you need to be aware that the "tracking" does not identify you or your entire web browsing activity -- that is misinformation perpetuated by
Second... consider this relatively similar scenario -- A television station is (because of legislation) unable to determine which ads play at which
time... leaving the entire delivery of commercials to random chance and unable to ensure the Coke commercial plays as expected during American Idol...
or unable to ensure that four consecutive commercials for diapers doesn't play during a commercial break for The Office. That scenario would be very
similar to what the total removal of all tracking would cause online. The result would be ineffective and non-targeted ads, which would pay
pennies-on-the-dollar as compared to current online advertising.
I agree that tracking cookies do not track the "entire" web-browsing activity of users, nor does it personally identify users except by , but it
does a dang good job of tracking users' habits, which concerns, irritates, and freaks me out. Anyone who uses Google knows this, because the targeted
ads based upon both web-browsing and
email content are scary. For instance, one searches for "workout weights" and you get targeted ads about
all kinds of muscle toner, diet, 'roids, etc, not mention ads within Gmail resultant from words that might be contained within messages.
I have a problem with this, even though i agree with your second point. Indeed, the targeted ads on say, television (or anywhere, or that matter) have
to be targeted correctly (women's commercials during daytime soap, mens ads during ball games, etc) or else they simply are not functionally
effective, and if not effective a waste of money and resources.
The thing that really crossed the line with me is this: a friend of mine sent me a link to a picture 'X.' I have never seen a picture of X, nor had
i ever heard of X. After viewing that picture, i had that image embedded in advertisements from third party websites across the internet
really bothers me, trying to use X, or something i might be interested in, to sell me something.
I would not, however, rather pay for a service, which is why i dropped the behemoth "you've got mail!" many years ago for the (free) Gmail. So, i
guess i am a hypocrite, wanting something for free but not wanting what makes it free. So be it.
While i understand that ad revenue drives small and indy websites and keeps them free and operating, i find them a nuisance and a distraction--across
the board. Whether on tv, radio, internet, billboards, fliers, junk mail, i loathe them, and i usually make it a point to not use said service or buy
said product simply because of this, and especially do not ever click on them. We are plastered with ads everywhere we go, and i try to avoid them
at all costs. I feel that they are an intrusion, they are unwanted, i did not ask for them, so i want nothing to do with them.
They are insidious little creatures.
But that's my personal opinion.