I'm so glad you're not at all strident about this.But, don't worry - it's ok to be wrong. I won't tell.
I love the simple-minded argument that says Advertising 'steals' money from people.
You, me - every fucker buys stuff, there's no gun to anyone's head. If you're (not you personally) too weak-minded as to be influenced into spending money on something you don't need, then - you know what - you get no sympathy here, sonny. Spend away.
(I love the simple-minded argument that says Advertising 'steals' money from people.
You, me - every fucker buys stuff, there's no gun to anyone's head. If you're (not you personally) too weak-minded as to be influenced into spending money on something you don't need, then - you know what - you get no sympathy here, sonny. Spend away.
J Peasemould Gruntfuttock Alpha Mike Foxtrot,
Thu 15 Jan 2009, 11:04,
archived)
Don't get me wrong.It's not actually the advertising leeches that I have issue with. It's the fact that this model ( layer 7 deep packet inspection ) is illegal under at least 5 separate areas of UK and EU law. It will be devastating to webmasters who are told they have given implied consent for anyone to harvest their copyrighted data so that visitors to their sites can later be served adverts for their competitors.
I've not seen an advert on the net in over 3 years and nobody has to but that is of little solace if people are allowed to intercept my communication for nothing other than financial gain which has no benefit to me. If I want to make a purchase I'll research it and still see no adverts. There is no need for my ISP or any advertiser to have any involvement in this other than my ISP doing what it is contractually obliged to do by providing gateway services.
There are legal ways to do this, they must use an opt-in only model and gain written consent from the publishers of all data that they harvest and that means both me and the content provider. This is what the law demands today but is being ignored because after all, opt-in is the death of any advertising model.
The upshot of it is that nobody, not even my ISP should be allowed to make a financial gain from my data. BT's model allows for opt-out ( despite EU commission rulings that anything of this nature must be opt in ) yet that does not change the fact that your data is still intercepted, parsed and then discarded when it knows you have opted out. The interception has already happened and the law has been broken.
Nobody in their right mind, whatever their job should support that. Until the law is changed you can't allow people to break it just because nobody gets killed and everyone except the consumer wins.
(I've not seen an advert on the net in over 3 years and nobody has to but that is of little solace if people are allowed to intercept my communication for nothing other than financial gain which has no benefit to me. If I want to make a purchase I'll research it and still see no adverts. There is no need for my ISP or any advertiser to have any involvement in this other than my ISP doing what it is contractually obliged to do by providing gateway services.
There are legal ways to do this, they must use an opt-in only model and gain written consent from the publishers of all data that they harvest and that means both me and the content provider. This is what the law demands today but is being ignored because after all, opt-in is the death of any advertising model.
The upshot of it is that nobody, not even my ISP should be allowed to make a financial gain from my data. BT's model allows for opt-out ( despite EU commission rulings that anything of this nature must be opt in ) yet that does not change the fact that your data is still intercepted, parsed and then discarded when it knows you have opted out. The interception has already happened and the law has been broken.
Nobody in their right mind, whatever their job should support that. Until the law is changed you can't allow people to break it just because nobody gets killed and everyone except the consumer wins.
Pasanonic 's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Thu 15 Jan 2009, 11:17,
archived)
On that, sir, I take little issue.I was merely trying to point out that whilst the ad industry certainly has it's more disreputable individuals, that does not necessarily apply to all of us.
( J Peasemould Gruntfuttock Alpha Mike Foxtrot,
Thu 15 Jan 2009, 11:20,
archived)
I know.but it would not be me if I did not call anyone a cunt.
I've avoided mentioning them but Phorm are the UK culprits and I can be nothing but pleased that I had a small part to play in their world last year. A world that saw them lose 85% of their value and most of their cash holdings without ever realising the smash and grab, big money takeover that Kent Ertugrul must have been betting on ( he's done it with every other startup he's masterminded in the last 20 years ).
(I've avoided mentioning them but Phorm are the UK culprits and I can be nothing but pleased that I had a small part to play in their world last year. A world that saw them lose 85% of their value and most of their cash holdings without ever realising the smash and grab, big money takeover that Kent Ertugrul must have been betting on ( he's done it with every other startup he's masterminded in the last 20 years ).
Pasanonic 's been known to cause insanity in laboratory mice,
Thu 15 Jan 2009, 11:25,
archived)