The conspiracy of "tracking cookie" paranoia

Originally posted by NJStomp
I would worry more about Index.dat then Cookies if you use IE. This file keeps a record of every single website you have visited and most people are not able to delete it. If you want to delete it you need to end Explorer from Task Manager and map to the file through Command Promt. You can then delete it and then restart explorer from Task Man.

Again, I do not trust MS, there is no reason for this so why is a record kept of where you go?
I dont allow MS, google or any companies to phone home
I dont allow cookies
I dont allow spyware
I dont allow adware
I dont allow anyone to access my data unless theres a reason and unless I want to and Im in charge of my computer, not some 3rd party who specialises in invasion of privacy for £s or $s.

That goes for people who cold call and ask for my name for any reason, I wont give it to them because I like my privacy.

Gee whiz....how come the phone company's detailed records of where you called, who you called, and what time/day you called, doesn't seem to arouse the same ire and suspicion? Heck, the video store has a detailed record of what and when you like to rent for entertainment. Not to mention the information represented by a library card.

Website 'cookies' are pretty darn benign. And browsing would suck really bad without them.

I have one complaint about them......they represent a way to place an data file on my computer. Regardless of the file's use and content, it is still a mechanism for some other entity to have write access to my hard drive.

Originally posted by MrPenny
Gee whiz....how come the phone company's detailed records of where you called, who you called, and what time/day you called, doesn't seem to arouse the same ire and suspicion? Heck, the video store has a detailed record of what and when you like to rent for entertainment. Not to mention the information represented by a library card.

The phone companies don't record calls, as far as we know (wink wink). They don't know what you said to the other end, just how long you talked. The intarweb records every keystroke.

I don't rent videos for the reason you post. I had an incredibly complicated protocol for renting movies that would throw "them" off the track. Now, I get movies without going to the store. . . .and with no records.

I don't check out books from certain books from the library. I just sit in there for hours, and read them on the spot, Like I do at Barnes and Noble's.

And the library doesn't share my information with porno stores and viagra salesmen, anyway. Not that I have a fake library card, but their security measures suck; they don't even cross reference county death records, or find it odd that Woodrow Wilson is still actively checking out books after 93 years. The point is, they don't really care, because there's no big money in datamining what those eggheads at the library are reading. The county library just wants their copy of Tropic of Cancer back after all these years.

.

Originally posted by Flyer

Originally posted by Cygnific
I would not be happy if they monitored email, chat, phone calls, and that is why that is not allowed for them to do this.. You yourself decide to visit a website and probably for a reason, so the owner of the website can collect data about what you did and make specific advertising or profiles to that cookie. The problem is that advertising will not go, so why not get the advertising you like?

I dont see any difference between someone monitoring phone calls etc than monitoring sites.

Advertising will go if you want it to, you dont have to ever see another ad again if you want.

Huh? Monitoring phone calls has nothing to do with advertisment or webprofiles. So please explain why they are the same to you?

Originally posted by Cygnific
Huh? Monitoring phone calls has nothing to do with advertisment or webprofiles. So please explain why they are the same to you?

If someone monitored your phone calls so they could send ads to you by mail, would you be happy?

I see no difference in monitoring phone call, email, chat, etc and monitoring the web sites you visit or even shops you personally visited.

If someone ask me to tell them the shops I use so they could send me related ads by mail, Id tell them to # off as its none of their business. Its none of these ad firms business to know what sites I visit.

All of these examples are an invasion of privacy yet for some reason, people are trying to tell us tracking cookies are fine.

Originally posted by Flyer
If someone monitored your phone calls so they could send ads to you by mail, would you be happy?

Certainly not. However, this is an extremely hypothetical speculation that has nothing to do with the issues of misplaced concern over cookies.

Originally posted by Flyer
All of these examples are an invasion of privacy yet for some reason, people are trying to tell us tracking cookies are fine.

Have you read the recent links I've posted? No one is recording the sites YOU visit.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Have you read the recent links I've posted? No one is recording the sites YOU visit.

Well, somebody is recording it, but not the cookie

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Certainly not. However, this is an extremely hypothetical speculation that has nothing to do with the issues of misplaced concern over cookies.

Its exactly the situation transferred from the internet to the real world.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Have you read the recent links I've posted? No one is recording the sites YOU visit.

I dont trust these companies, they have been devious from the start and the law has even been changed in the US to protect surfers and the US law usually does nothing but pander to corporations so its not just me that doesnt trust them.

I dont want anything on my computer that I havent asked for, especially when its spyware. You can trust what they do with that info but Im not that gullible.

"The MediaPlex cookie currently deposited to visitors browsing Monster.com, for example, contains a statement that it "stores identifiable information without any user consent." "

www.worldprivacyforum.org...

Originally posted by Flyer
Its exactly the situation transferred from the internet to the real world.

Not really. Someone hypothetically listening to your phone calls knows it's you. They would know your name, address, phone number, etc. The best cookie tracking can do is build a profile of "someone" based on sites they visit, but there's nothing to correlated that "someone" to YOU. It's a very different situation.

I dont trust these companies, they have been devious from the start and the law has even been changed in the US to protect surfers and the US law usually does nothing but pander to corporations so its not just me that doesnt trust them.

If we can find some hard information on what deviousness has been done, I'm game. But from all my years dealing with this issue, the real deviousness is coming from the "security software" firms.

You don't trust the companies writing cookies because of the hyped stories of what *might* happen, and what *could* be tracked.

I dont want anything on my computer that I havent asked for, especially when its spyware.

Cookies aren't spyware... they're simple text files unable to execute code.

www.worldprivacyforum.org...

For example, if you are looking for a job on Monster.com (which as of this writing deposits advertising.com cookies, among others) and then you go look at a health Web site such as MD.com, then a company called Advertising.com knows you have been to both places

Let's look at the facts.
www.advertising.com...

Advertising.com and its third party advertising technology vendor uses cookie files to collect anonymous web-surfing information, known as Click Stream Data, on web surfers who visit websites in our web network, and who respond to advertisements that we show. None of the Click Stream Data is personally identifiable. Collecting the Click Stream Data assists us in delivering targeted and more relevant advertising messages to web surfers.

and
www.advertising.com...
Nothing appears to be hidden... all is in the open.

A company called Advertising.com doesn't know YOU have been to both places unless you tell them. Otherwise, it's an anonymous user.


Now, Flyer, I'm not trying to "dig into you" in the least... and I appreciate you being upfront about your concerns. Some of my "cookie paranoia" curiosity was sparked by some chatter in an email list of "Internet old timers" I belong to, and related news stories. As a result, I've been running a test (more on that later), but there's one huge surprise --> you'd think the people visiting a website on conspiracies would tend to refuse and/or delete cookies... but only 10% of all our visitors either refuse or delete their cookies within 72 hours... that's a surprise.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Not really. Someone hypothetically listening to your phone calls knows it's you. They would know your name, address, phone number, etc. The best cookie tracking can do is build a profile of "someone" based on sites they visit, but there's nothing to correlated that "someone" to YOU. It's a very different situation.

Yes there is, they store personally identifiable info. Exactly what you posted above.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
If we can find some hard information on what deviousness has been done, I'm game. But from all my years dealing with this issue, the real deviousness is coming from the "security software" firms.

They stored spyware on your computer without your knowledge.

If something tracks your moves without your knowledge, its spyware. My browser blocks what I want so I really dont care about what the security firms want me to buy.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
You don't trust the companies writing cookies because of the hyped stories of what *might* happen, and what *could* be tracked.

Yes, why risk it when there is exactly zero benefit for me in allowing them?

You still havent answered that and you cannot answer that question.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Cookies aren't spyware... they're simple text files unable to execute code.

Yes they are, they track your moves without you knowledge, its a text book definition of spyware.

"Spyware is computer software that collects personal information about users without their informed consent. "

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Now, Flyer, I'm not trying to "dig into you" in the least... and I appreciate you being upfront about your concerns. Some of my "cookie paranoia" curiosity was sparked by some chatter in an email list of "Internet old timers" I belong to, and related news stories. As a result, I've been running a test (more on that later), but there's one huge surprise --> you'd think the people visiting a website on conspiracies would tend to refuse and/or delete cookies... but only 10% of all our visitors either refuse or delete their cookies within 72 hours... that's a surprise.

People are ignorant of it, I bet if you told them exactly what was happening, the number would be a lot higher. 10% is probably the same amount that do a weekly spyware/adware/virus scan on their computers, it doesnt mean I want or they want any of that stuff on there.

Originally posted by Cygnific

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, your ISP now tracks your browsing history in complete detail... and they're not telling you they're doing it. And while we're on personal history, do you have any grocery store discount cards?

Exactly, people seem to be more worried about a cookie, then what their ISP/Phone operator needs to log by law (atleast in Europe) grocery/bank/credit cards, they all know when, where, what, how much you bought. And this stuff you can't wipe with CCleaner.

These things aren't true for all of us. Yes our ISP tracks us with a big-brother like efficiency but not all of us use the other things. I only use my bank card at cash machines which do not charge me specifically because I don't see the need for that data to be stored on me. Yes they know I use the MAC machine at Reddner's Market but they don't know what I'm buying and my supermarket doesn't use those nasty tracking cards(which are more or less cookies they've attached to us). Which is the point I was making in this post. We can get around many of the real life "tracking cookies" like the supermarket cards, but they ARE ALWAYS trying to track our every movement and action and trying to get us to give our conscent for them to do it.

People a generation younger than me in the future probably won't even be able to conceptuallize our arguements against things like cookies and it is because here and now we are letting them get away with it.

But I think "Resistance is futile"

Vas

I had another thought about the "tracking cookie paranoia". I don't know if I can express this clearly but I'm going to try.

I seems to me that cookies, their legitimate purpose, are a symtom of capitalism.

Let me see if I can explain. When used properly they give us the comsumer a great deal while asking almost nothing. When used properly they help keep our website free and let us login without effort and at the same time maybe make a little bit of money through advertising for the website that we support. From how I understand it though, no one is making a killing in web advertising yet.

So that's why I say cookies are a capitalist tool.

Some of us(us being me and whoever but I'm not labeling anyone here) are not overly fond of capitalism and maybe at some unconsious level we are reacting in a negitive way.

Does any of this sound reasonable?

Vas

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
I am fully against tracking cookies.

Could you help us understand why?

To put it bluntly, It is mine and only my business where I go/or have been on the web.

I feel it is not Goggles or anyone else’s-even ATS's business.

I feel it is a tremendous invasion of personal privacy.

I understand the "original" idea of cookies was to do things like remember your settings, username, password,...., when you go back to websites.

I see THAT as being helpful to most people on the web.

Personally, I prefer stronger security for my computer, so I delete all cookies and temp files..., but that is just me.

I think if ATS were to use tracking cookies, it would be very sadly wrong-ah hello conspiracy site- and it would need to be clearly told to all members and lurkers alike.

Yep, I hate cookies and clear them as often as possible (or let firefox do it for me).

I also clean my registry regularly, don't buy online, don't have "store cards", have one credit card for emergencies only, have a good firewall that puts me in "stealth" mode, am immune to advertising, don't wear labels, don't own a tv, question everything, hate corporations and authorities (how am I doing)?

Oh..............and by the way...............

Google has just bought a share of a genetics firm too so they can improve their so called "personalisation" services (yeah, right)!

my ats thread here

NO to cookies thankyou very much!

p.s. good thread SkepticOverlord, lots of info.

[edit on 22/5/2007 by nerbot]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
I am fully against tracking cookies.

Could you help us understand why?

Can you say BUMP!!!???

I'll tell you why this Interactive Advertising Bureau sucks.

Your personal Computer better be personal... meaning you don't want other people to use the computer that is in your home... if you have anything to hide.

Story:

I go to my friends house and show him ATS on his own computer. Guess what advertisments come up while I'm on his computer? Let's just say the I saw things like:

"Do you want to be bigger?"

"Enlargement"

Get the picture? I didn't want to see those ads on his computer... because now I have a clear idea of what he has been doing on the internet.



This is why the Interactive Advertising Bureau (look at their all seeing eye logo) needs to go.



Is this a good enough reason Bill?


It really sucks because my kids often go to this guys house to play video games on the internet (Tower Defense Monkey Baloon Games are awsome!!!)... and my kids are going to have to see these very inappropriate ads for pills that make your dingus bigger.

What has the internet become?



[edit on 23-1-2009 by Doomsday 2029]

Originally posted by Doomsday 2029
This is why the Interactive Advertising Bureau (look at their all seeing eye logo) needs to go.

The IAB has nothing to do with the placement of cookies on yours, or anyone's, computer.

In fact, some of their efforts are directed toward the ethical use of cookies by advertisers.

However, I'm highly suspicious of your story. None of the advertiser networks that appear on ATS are allowed to deliver those types of ads. Are you certain you weren't seeing pop-ups triggered by malware?

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
And while we're on personal history, do you have any grocery store discount cards?

I think you have a good point there.
Internet cookies commercial uses can be compared a lot with those "grocery store discount cards".
They dont need your personal information for those, just like with the cookies.
But it can still generate a lot of marketing information that "can" be used against consumers as a whole.
Like with the discount cards they look for the ideal consumer in their shop, not the person but the profile.
The profile that generates most profit, than they addapt the store to that ideal consumer.

This is not per se bad for the consumer, but it is not allways better for consumers.

I think those mentioned cards and cookies can have a lot in common when used for marketing purposes.

I clean up my pc from spyware cookies and virusus about once a month, the same as i clean my car once a month

Some info on the cards.

So what is the real purpose?
Card programs allow stores to identify who their "best" customers are and then cater the store to meet their needs.
A study conducted in the late 90's showed that 75% of a supermarkets profit came from just 30% of their customers.
When store spokespeople say they exist simply to "Reward the best shoppers.
We will target them in the future.
They will get the benefits", as QFC recently stated in Seattle, it certainly sounds like they are referring to everyone that participates, but the real goal is to identify and reward that elite 30% [10].
For store executives, "loyal" is synonymous with "high profit" and if you don't meet that criterion, don't expect your current shopping experience to remain the same for much longer.

link

I am no technical expert on cokkies so i cant comment to much on them.
But i do see comparable marketing purposes, consumer profiling with out identity.
This does not always work in "our" best interest, the same could count for cookie profiling.



[edit on 24-1-2009 by jaamaan]

[edit on 24-1-2009 by jaamaan]

[edit: link]

[edit on 24-1-2009 by jaamaan]

n Firefox 1.0, click Tools, Options. Click the Privacy icon in the sidebar and then click the plus sign to the left of the Cookies heading to expand your list of options. Click to select both options: Allow sites to set cookies and for the originating web site only.

source

This is interesting, I can't locate how FF 3.8.12 blocks cookies entirely. I have ad block plug in but not sure how to configure it so FF blocks all cookies except the ones I want.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.. thx guys!