Comments on: Senate Begins Discussing Privacy Implications of Online Advertising http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/ Just another WordPress weblog Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:29:10 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jonathan http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-3002 Jonathan Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:41:16 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-3002 Gorilla marketing in today's economy is everything, marketing to get through the recession!<br>If your interested in web optimization for your site, there is a free site for uploading video ads for your business, they also have image uploads if you are not yet up to videos. The more sites you can link to the greater your market will be. They have a free link exchange as well. <br><br> http://adwido.com Gorilla marketing in today's economy is everything, marketing to get through the recession!
If your interested in web optimization for your site, there is a free site for uploading video ads for your business, they also have image uploads if you are not yet up to videos. The more sites you can link to the greater your market will be. They have a free link exchange as well.

 http://adwido.com

]]> By: Jonathan http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-3001 Jonathan Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:40:55 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-3001 <a href="http://www.bizgrowthseo.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.bizgrowthseo.com</a> http://www.bizgrowthseo.com

]]> By: ZaggedEdge http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-2996 ZaggedEdge Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:54:39 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-2996 It's a shame congress needs to step in to tell FB what they can and cannot do. It's too bad there's no clearcut way to tell users their privacy rights, without the legal garbage in the privacy statement. It’s a shame congress needs to step in to tell FB what they can and cannot do. It’s too bad there’s no clearcut way to tell users their privacy rights, without the legal garbage in the privacy statement.

]]> By: ZaggedEdge http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-2999 ZaggedEdge Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:54:39 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-2999 It's a shame congress needs to step in to tell FB what they can and cannot do. It's too bad there's no clearcut way to tell users their privacy rights, without the legal garbage in the privacy statement. It's a shame congress needs to step in to tell FB what they can and cannot do. It's too bad there's no clearcut way to tell users their privacy rights, without the legal garbage in the privacy statement.

]]> By: ZaggedEdge http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-7833 ZaggedEdge Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:54:39 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-7833 It's a shame congress needs to step in to tell FB what they can and cannot do. It's too bad there's no clearcut way to tell users their privacy rights, without the legal garbage in the privacy statement. It's a shame congress needs to step in to tell FB what they can and cannot do. It's too bad there's no clearcut way to tell users their privacy rights, without the legal garbage in the privacy statement.

]]> By: Alex O'Neal http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-2998 Alex O'Neal Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:09:54 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-2998 Kelly's "critical distinction...between the use of personal information for advertisements in personally-identifiable form, and the use, dissemination, or sharing of information with advertisers in non-personally-identifiable form" does not really protect users. Many times such protection takes the form of assigning an "anonymous" tag to a user, which doesn't hide them at all. Take the classic example of "anonymous" AOL searcher 4417749, quickly identified by two New York Times reporters as a 62-year-old widow in Georgia in 2006. Simple data mining of search, application, and other pseudo-anonymous non-profile data can get finely granulated results, right down to a given individual. You don't even need a unique identifier (such as no. 4417749) to identify a specific human. Surely a privacy executive at Facebook understands this. Kelly’s “critical distinction…between the use of personal information for advertisements in personally-identifiable form, and the use, dissemination, or sharing of information with advertisers in non-personally-identifiable form” does not really protect users.

Many times such protection takes the form of assigning an “anonymous” tag to a user, which doesn’t hide them at all. Take the classic example of “anonymous” AOL searcher 4417749, quickly identified by two New York Times reporters as a 62-year-old widow in Georgia in 2006. Simple data mining of search, application, and other pseudo-anonymous non-profile data can get finely granulated results, right down to a given individual. You don’t even need a unique identifier (such as no. 4417749) to identify a specific human.

Surely a privacy executive at Facebook understands this.

]]> By: alexfiles http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/07/senate-begins-discussing-privacy-implications-of-online-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-7832 alexfiles Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:09:54 +0000 http://www.socialtimes.com/?p=634#comment-7832 Kelly's "critical distinction...between the use of personal information for advertisements in personally-identifiable form, and the use, dissemination, or sharing of information with advertisers in non-personally-identifiable form" does not really protect users. <br><br>Many times such protection takes the form of assigning an "anonymous" tag to a user, which doesn't hide them at all. Take the classic example of "anonymous" AOL searcher 4417749, quickly identified by two New York Times reporters as a 62-year-old widow in Georgia in 2006. Simple data mining of search, application, and other pseudo-anonymous non-profile data can get finely granulated results, right down to a given individual. You don't even need a unique identifier (such as no. 4417749) to identify a specific human. <br><br>Surely a privacy executive at Facebook understands this. Kelly's “critical distinction…between the use of personal information for advertisements in personally-identifiable form, and the use, dissemination, or sharing of information with advertisers in non-personally-identifiable form” does not really protect users.

Many times such protection takes the form of assigning an “anonymous” tag to a user, which doesn't hide them at all. Take the classic example of “anonymous” AOL searcher 4417749, quickly identified by two New York Times reporters as a 62-year-old widow in Georgia in 2006. Simple data mining of search, application, and other pseudo-anonymous non-profile data can get finely granulated results, right down to a given individual. You don't even need a unique identifier (such as no. 4417749) to identify a specific human.

Surely a privacy executive at Facebook understands this.

]]>