Twitter to let ad pals TRACK COOKIES on micro-blogging site Twitter needs to make more money from advertising - to do that it has decided to follow the lead of other free content social media networks by targeting its users' cookies to create tracking profiles for its ad partners. The privately-held micro-blogging site said in a blog post that it would, for now, be displaying promoted …
All these social media sites are dedicated to the antithesis of privacy - they exist to allow people to publish any random thing they choose to publish.
And it surprises people that such sites invade your privacy with tracking cookies, and allow others to do the same.
Folks: If you aren't writing a check for a service, you are not the customer, you are the product, and the service makes money selling you to its real customers.
"All these social media sites are dedicated to the antithesis of privacy - they exist to allow people to publish any random thing they choose to publish.
[OK Ladz stage one complete. Dirty bomb in broom cupboard HoP]
[Brill FLOTUS Fanny Probe rechargeables replaced with Apple returns]
[Confirm same for Anal Probe CAMER1-E]
[Victor Kiam has bought the nose of POTUS. Scrambled eggs are on the menu]
-
-
[You do kno the Mercaptans will be confused by Fanny?]
[So they will look in the wrong hole. How's D'Day?]
[How's HRAP?]
[She's a bitch]
[No, the 'Big Bird' place]
[I'll boot up the SUV]
And it surprises people that such sites invade your privacy with tracking cookies, and allow others to do the same.
Folks: If you aren't writing a check for a service, you are not the customer, you are the product, and the service makes money selling you to its real customers."
.... Thank you for those words of wisdom. Gosh you know quite a lot about this lark. You must be one of those commentards on El Reg and/or work in the industry. I hear they challenge FaceBook and Twitter in respect of their subscribed user base. Mr Ballmer said so...
Not being 'au fait' I only read about it today when I came across the site whilst doing research on 'Female Tree hugging in private, how to share with more than two Trees'.
I am telling you this I was pretty bloody annoyed to discover Twitter had done this without telling me in the first place. I was forced to do some research elsewhere and it appears that these people regularly change what they said without asking first. Apparently it is rife.. Twitter, FaceBook, Phorm, Politicians GCHQ, NSA, ETC...
One common factor appears to be that they promise something in order to gain a user base and then do something entirely different without mentioning it and then someone else has to find out and tell the rest of us. It even seems some of them are prone to 'throwing their toys out of the pram', or saying 'it improves the browsing experience' when this happens.
Now then as a Big Bottomed Scato SadoDom, Rubber For Extra™, I've got a theory about this. You see.. if I just slapped my wobbling cheeks either side of any and everyone's face and gave them an oral injection of Solyent Brown creaminess they might complain and I could be prosecuted...
I am making a basic assumption that the ICO or the 'cough cough cough', regular clients, are not in charge of the legislation that would be involved in which case I would not . Do not forget I just deliver.
Fortunately I ask first or someone requests my services in advance, 0779xxxxxxxx [Bitch Edit], and in either case there is much one to one discussion involved before we move forward. Having selected your 'safe' word, clients usually settle on Banana, we move forward to, my, Curry & Batemans prior to the Hotel Room....
You might wish to compare and contrast...
Twitter, et al, shits first and gets found out later.
I discuss it with the client first and select the Restaurant and Hotel. The client does not say 'Banana' and does not end up in the next client.
Oh good.. new install of Linux is ready. Click.
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ETC,
-
-
Ooooo I just Pooed myself
Current EU law requires sites to obtain a visitor's consent before they install a cookie in their browser
There is no single EU law on this - it is devolved to national governments so not really the Commission's problem.
Explicit consent is only required for non-essential cookies for which there is no fixed definition. Among essential cookies can be considered to be session cookies and shopping basket cookies, user preferences, etc. Statistic cookies are probably debatable depending on how they are configured: lifetime and data contained. Problematic are all the third-party cookies. However, as El Reg should but apparently doesn't know: agreement can easily obtained through a sign-up form. As long as Twitter's users are logged in then they have agreed to Twitter's T&C's, as indeed we commentards have to El Reg's, which presumably include the right to trade personal data with third parties. The stupid banner at the bottom of El Reg does not comply with the law as it "we'll assume you're happy to accept the cookies anyway." can in no way be construed to be someone providing explicit consent.
The stupid banner at the bottom of El Reg does not comply with the law as it "we'll assume you're happy to accept the cookies anyway." can in no way be construed to be someone providing explicit consent.
Presumably you missed the 11th hour turn around by the ICO who decided that it was acceptable, leaving everyone worse off because there's pointless banners everywhere now.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
