The True Cost of Online Privacy

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
What is the true cost of online privacy? Any time an article asks what is the “true” amount of something, you know for a fact the answer isn’t going to be what you want to hear. :eek:

Do you like your privacy? I bet you do. What about being able to read all kinds of stuff on the internet without having to hand over your credit card number -- do you like that, too? I bet that's another yes. But which do you like more? You'd better figure that out quickly, because, if you don't, Congress just might decide for you.
Click to expand...
 
I think the article should be read with a giant slab of salt. The article reeks of FUD. While there may be some truth hiding within the article, keep in mind that even *if* websites won't get as much money from advertising revenue because they can't spy on folks, they will still probably be making some amount of money for hosting ads on their site. There are some websites right now that do this and make enough money to keep their servers going because they aren't as interested in profits compared with being able to make their voice heard which I think is really what the internet is about- average Joes voicing concerns, adding commentary, etc...
 
Bunch of FUD, mainly because:

  1. The U.S. government doesn't own the internet. ICANN, IAB, major ISPs who own large DNS servers and routers do. To think that they own it is astonishingly arrogant.
  2. They already collect data.
 
id like to think that we the people own the internet. because even if icann or whoever tries to shut it down, the people that actually provide the content on the internet will find other ways to communicate.
 
Hmm... TV ads don't know what you're doing or where you've been, but the article itself admits they make more money than internet ads. Thus, internet advertisements should be able to survive without invasive intel gathering. Advertisement purchasers just haven't realized how valuable internet ads are. Can you click on your TV and buy something on a whim then and there?
 
Yossarian22 said:
Bunch of FUD, mainly because:

  1. The U.S. government doesn't own the internet. ICANN, IAB, major ISPs who own large DNS servers and routers do. To think that they own it is astonishingly arrogant.
  2. They already collect data.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's why everything is legal on the internet.

What?
 
Spewn said:
Yeah, that's why everything is legal on the internet.

What?
Click to expand...

It's no different than you owning your lot in the city. But the government still does have reaches into it (IE, city codes... Can't have bon fire, permits for new construction, etc, etc ,etc). But the government by no means owns it.
 
Tokamak said:
Hmm... TV ads don't know what you're doing or where you've been, but the article itself admits they make more money than internet ads. Thus, internet advertisements should be able to survive without invasive intel gathering. Advertisement purchasers just haven't realized how valuable internet ads are. Can you click on your TV and buy something on a whim then and there?
Click to expand...

advertisements per channel are selected based on the average viewer of their content, its not just random these advertisers select carefully what they advertise, where and when.

you wouldn't see GI Joe toys advertised on MTV...
 
I always see ads for boner pills and hair loss...it's like they're in my freakin' head or something.
:D
 
Trimlock said:
advertisements per channel are selected based on the average viewer of their content, its not just random these advertisers select carefully what they advertise, where and when.

you wouldn't see GI Joe toys advertised on MTV...
Click to expand...

Even semi-intelligent advertisements on the net fail to deliver. I have never once been attracted by some silly advertisement somewhere online.

If semi-intelligent advertisements don't work based on cookies and location and search parameters on google do not work, how will "intelligent" advertisements work? Bottom line that these advertisement parasites need to realize is that you can't sell somebody who doesn't need nor want anything. Apparently, it works though, because they're still around.
I think the shotgun method of advertising to a broad audience works better. When I see nice food on TV, I get hungry. I eat. But you can't sell me turds or ShamWow, etc...

Regarding the line that the government can reach into the internet and regulate it (it is true) but by no means owns it is still exceedingly arrogant. The U.S. is not the "police of the world". Good shining example is that guy who got bagged for hentai a couple days ago. They were calling it CP. Incredible. I'm sure the world is a much safer place, now. :rolleyes:

Well, here is fingers crossed they'll start arresting "furries" next.
 
"Even semi-intelligent advertisements on the net fail to deliver. I have never once been attracted by some silly advertisement somewhere online."

I have. Newegg here on [H] typcally runs good ads. That's targeted. :)

Now the gubmint gonna take away my internets! Oh noes! The modem tax! The resin factory fire! Oh noes, teh FUD! :)
 
Ads can be a pain, and it seem that there are always more of them. I hate stuff that's pop up somewhere in the way. Therefore I gladly block all adds and flash.
 
I've said it before, and I'll say it again here: so long as the total volume of ads does not increase, I would prefer targeted advertising over random advertising any day. Think about it: if you're going to have to look at a certain number of ads to finance your web surfing anyway, wouldn't you rather those ads be for things you care about rather than a bunch of, "you are the ten millionth visitor!" flashing banners?

I think targeted advertising is a win-win: companies make more money per ad, and I get to see ads that may actually help me instead of the usual junk. Privacy issues are a concern, I know, but large databases tend to provide a certain degree of anonymity anyway (does anyone really care if user #115,683,105 just visited a tech website?).
 
Miscommunication said:
bucket said:
I always see ads for boner pills and hair loss...it's like they're in my freakin' head or something.
:D
Click to expand...
No that's just for late-night viewers ;).
Click to expand...

I think that's potentially an example of how targeted ads could be better. I'm currently mistargeted by the current system, as I watch late-night TV, have no hair loss, and if I need a boner pill, it would need to be a pill to make the damn thing go away.
 
Ads don't do a DAMN thing for me. They're just "there", as part of a website. I can choose to click it or not. I don't even freaking notice them. When I'm on a site, I'm on that site to be on THAT site, nothing else. All ads are bullshit to me and I never have a reason to click them. I don't care what's on it. If it's free this or that, then I especially won't click on it, because I know it'll be total bullshit.

Idiots who treat internet advertising the same way as, say, billboard advertising are just that - IDIOTS! It's easy to lie on the internet.
 
stop!theradio said:
Ads don't do a DAMN thing for me. They're just "there", as part of a website. I can choose to click it or not. I don't even freaking notice them. When I'm on a site, I'm on that site to be on THAT site, nothing else. All ads are bullshit to me and I never have a reason to click them. I don't care what's on it. If it's free this or that, then I especially won't click on it, because I know it'll be total bullshit.

Idiots who treat internet advertising the same way as, say, billboard advertising are just that - IDIOTS! It's easy to lie on the internet.
Click to expand...

Not exactly idiots, in the late 90's it worked really well, they got too technical with the adds I believe, I almost never even notice them anymore
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top