Apple's 'Do Not Track' feature goes on Safari The next version of Apple's Safari browser will reportedly come loaded with a "Do Not Track" feature that Mozilla has already debuted in Firefox. According to the Wall Street Journal, Apple plans to slot the tool into its latest Safari iteration when it releases its forthcoming Mac OS X 10.7, aka Lion, operating system. …
"The US Federal Trade Commission has requested a single mechanism that makes it easy for web surfers to be unhindered by behavioural ad targeting."
So how about making it opt in, so you can only track people with permission. Seems to fit the bill perfectly. But of course, that wouldn't let them make all their money while allowing you to look like you give a damn...
Not that it is any better here in the UK :S
That implies a centralize point where all user's cookies are collected. But, surely, the owner of that system would never even conceive of exploiting all that information for personal gain, right?
As an analogy, consider something like AdBlock Plus. The day the developer of that extension requires me to register with him is the day he loses my trust.
-dZ.
Google sharing it's called and to be fair all it makes mincemeat of is adsense. It does mean you sometimes get ad's in foreign languages and if I'm completely honest it's a bit buggy - I get annoyed and turn it off periodically when it's crashed firefox one to many times, but when it works it renders Google's data useless, which is a worthy goal in it self...
@DZ-Jay I think ad tracking cookies are quite well known (eg doubleclick.net), it should be possible to create a filter and not store any others centrally.
@Unknown cow heard Amazing stuff that Google sharing proxy :) Pity it's focused only on Google.
Maybe something to do one of this weekends.
I only used Firefox because of the privacy extensions, but I tended to use Safari (in "private mode") for quick searches, since Firefox is so dog-slow to open and manoeuvre. Now that most plug-ins like AdBlock and Ghostery are available for Safari, I find myself using Firefox even less.
-dZ.
It seems that marketing companies will do absolutely *anything*, no matter how unethical, annoying, or downright disgusting, unless they are explicitly told not to and we pass laws banning the practice (and even that doesn't really put an end to the problem). I've registered for do-not-call lists and taken every step available to stop the endless disruption, and yet I'm still getting at least one call a day that starts with a long silence on the line ("hello, hello?") followed by cheerful greeting and an assurance that, "this is not a marketing call", followed by a marketing spiel that can only be ended by hanging up.
Advertising from legitimate businesses, which is little better than spam, keeps flowing into my account, and the 'unsubscribe' can't be used because you have to "create an account" first (which involves handing over all the personal info I don't want them to have in the first place). Airlines like KLM and Air France are classic examples of this - everything I've tried to stop the email doesn't work, including writing, email, and phone calls. The trash just keeps piling in.
It makes me wonder what kind of person runs these operations, and how they came to lose all their scruples? I make a point of avoiding businesses who operate like this, but they must be succeeding nonetheless...
In the UK all "subscription" services must support a STOP command. If this is not possible then report the perpetrator to Off-Whatsit. Cold-calling is illegal but will continue if people let it. The threat of legal action can work wonders for those who are hard of hearing.
That said I've recently flown a few times with Air France and my inbox is mercifully bare. Wish I could say the same about flea-bay!
As an opera user (bare with me) I'd like this feature too!
It's fecking annoying having these zealots spitting their crap over every browser related article. Use whatever gets the job done and do it quietly.
I use linux as well, doesn't mean I post some shit about it on every Windows/ OS X/ BSD/ etc article.
I wouldn't mind giving up my right to post to get rid of these commentards.
No really, I just simply don't get it. Why all the hoopla about 'do not track'?
The ONLY difference it *MIGHT* make is you don't get PERSONALISED ads instead of generic ads.
And that's ONLY if the primary, secondary AND third party ad sites comply with the "do not track" system.
NOTHING else changes.
How does this "help" the end user? My view has been that personalised ads are more effective, because you actually might be interested in buying the crap they're peddling, verses generic crap you probably don't care about.
Your activity is still being logged, and is still being used to generate averages for others.
So, enabling "do not track" actualy makes things WORSE for you.
Or you can install NoScript + Adblock Plus and be done with it.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
