|
I admire the thought but I think you should put it in perspective.
Firstly, your blog itself is powered by Google sites. Your visitors are tracked. End of story.
Secondly, tracking by collecting anonymous information, or tagging a person in order to build an anonymous profile and hence provide targeted advertising is very, very different than scanning emails and phone calls looking for keywords to score you and determine whether to send the boys in dark suits and dark glasses to pay you a visit.
<soapbox>
I honestly feel that the Snowden and Wikileaks stuff has made people more aware (good) but propagated extreme and unwarranted paranoia (bad) and has compromised countries' abilities to protect and compete against those entities that are truly, deeply malicious in their data interception (very, very bad).
Privacy has become a soap opera issue where everyone says "it's bed" without understanding fully what's being done, in what capacity, and why. There's a huge jumping-on-the-bandwagon mentality happening. Visa and my cellphone company know way WAY more about me, my spending habits, where I go, who I talk to, and what I own than any government in the world. And I actually let them - in fact I pay them to have this data.
Yes, there needs to be oversight to protect your personal data but what about the data already in non-governmental agencies? Take a look at how many people have suffered identity theft because employees at credit agencies have sold their information.
Take stock of what tracking currently happens. Decide whether it even matters, whether it may in fact help you get to things that interest you, and how easy it is to nuke whatever tie-in that tracking has to you (delete your cookies and you're free). Then decide if you're actually that important or even vaguely interesting to whomever's doing the tracking and think to yourself what would happen if the institutions whose job it was to protect a country could not actually do their job.
My previous employment has given me, admittedly, a unique perspective on this and I totally agree safeguards and common sense need to be in place, but for me it's like traffic cops: I'd much rather risk a $150 fine for doing 10kmh over the limit than not have anyone there for the crazies driving at 180kmh.
And I also know I'm just not that interesting.
</soapbox>
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: the boys in dark suits and dark glasses
These guys?[^]
That would be kinda' cool.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
No, more like this[^]. And then you'd probably have to get jiggy wit it.
|
|
|
|
|
Well Said.
The thought process is simple, there are probably robotic checks on electronic data and when something of importance is encountered, it is flagged and few such flag may prompt some human to look into it. Until then it is anonymous tracking just like analytics tracking.
Only typing some obvious words into your blogs or emails doesn't make you victim because the smart guys at whatever agency it is, must have had given enough thought to make sure not to increase their work-load by sending "man with black suit and dark glasses" to every blogger /email users who may use some obvious words ! Else all nasty guys will purposefully increase their load...
We discuss this at home many a times (we in India) the same thing. Its better to get policed a bit more than be in danger of some terror attack. USA is rather successful in averting major disaster after 9/11 more likely than not because of such measures (tracking /crazy airport checks and what not) they have taken post that unfortunate event.
Thanks,
Milind
|
|
|
|
|
Markus Sprunck wrote: If we compain that NSA, GCHQ, BND and all the others agencies spy us, we
should stop to collect data about visitors of our own webpages.
Markus Sprunck wrote: Maybe you do the same for your pages and/or you share this idea with friends
which have a personal page and/or blog.
Except you track usage data to improve the quality of what you offer.
The Gov tracks you to control you.
BIIIG difference
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: Gov tracks you to control you.
Really?
You don't think they track you to improve the quality (and reduce the costs) of what they offer?
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
What exactly does the government offer? Last I checked, they only impose (i.e., we have no choice) on us things that will make them wealthier.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"Show me a community that obeys the Ten Commandments and I'll show you a less crowded prison system." - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
DavidCrow wrote: Last I checked, they only impose (i.e., we have no choice) on us things that will make them wealthier.
I kind of like the fact that it is unlikely that a bridges, offices and houses will fall down while I am on/in them.
Not to mention the vastly reduced chance that I will burn to death in any modern high rise or even many smaller business structures.
Of course when a fire does start it is rather nice to have someone come to put it out.
Rather nice that the criminal justice system is in fact very successful in the modern age for administering justice in an equitable manner. Doesn't mean it is perfect of course but then there is absolutely no way for it to be perfect.
I like being able to buy food from a number of places in a number of different forms and being almost 100% guaranteed that when I do buy it that it is in fact the food that it was claimed to be and that it will not kill me. And at a price that is incredibly low.
I like the fact that my neighbor cannot start disposing nuclear waste in his backyard just to make a few extra bucks.
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: The Gov tracks you to control you
How?
|
|
|
|
|
All your base are belong to us
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: How?
The question I ask is how these searches any different than directly coming into your home? There are completely legit ways of searching someone. 
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
|
|
|
|
|
This is utter nonsense. Keeping track of anonymous information of voluntary visitors to your web site is not spying. Arguing otherwise is obscene. What's next, erasing your call and text history on your phone? Deleting all emails the moment they arrive? Hell, better stop saying goodbye to your family and friends since you might see where they are going.
(To be clear; there is NO moral equivalency between actions taken voluntarily or as the result of voluntary action and those taken, or caused by, the force of government and tyranny.)
modified 23-Nov-13 23:50pm.
|
|
|
|
|
There's no need to be so rude about it!
So, the change wont make a practical difference to you, me or likely anyone else around here. So what?
If you cant/don't/wont appreciate the sentiment, just move along.
My sentiments towards your post are -1. It's just not worthy of an abuse report. But, the sentiment remains.
Your post would certainly get some lovin' from me if the ability to down-vote remained..
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps I was being forceful, but I don't think I was being rude. If he felt I was, I apologize. I strongly disagree with his post and felt he was making a false moral equivalency.
|
|
|
|
|
I hadn't picked up a vibe of forcefulness, instead finding it to have what I felt was an insulting tone.
But, it seems to be an unfounded concern - it doesn't look like the original poster took offence.
Besides, intentions are often the most important part of a communication - nothing you've just said gives the impression that there were any insults intended or included. It seems that the three of us have all had the chance to better explain our positions. Pretty sure no kittens, hamsters or feelings have been hurt in the process!
Take a +1 from me and enjoy the remainder of your weekend. 
|
|
|
|
|
Many thanks for your comment,
Google Analytic offers no direct data about the identity of users, but you can find the user information in an indirect way.
For example: My site has visitors from 140 countries per year. One of them lives in Nepal and I know about this user: location, operating system, screen resolution, browser version, conversions, search querries, language settings, social interactions, time on my pages, web provider, etc. And Google Analytics stores (if this is not technically disabled) the IP adress.
I can't identify the name of this user - but in the case he/she makes a social interaction liked with my site (facebook, google+, etc.) I'm able to identify the person.
This is not so thrilling for a technical blog, but if you have this inforation for 66% of all popular pages you can find out realy a lot about his/her activities. (Wikipedia says: "Google Analytics is used by 66.2% of the 10,000 most popular websites ordered by popularity, as reported by BuiltWith in August, 2013")
In the case I activate Google Analytics on my site every visit on my site will be stored on a Google server in USA. This information is not realy protected (at least for non US citizens) by access from NSA, et. al.
At the moment about 54.000 people work for Google and - I'm sure - a lot have and/or can get access to this information. Don't get me wrong - I like Google Inc. (good products and code of conduct). Lets estimate that they have 5000 people with extended access rights and 99.9% are honest and never do someting wrong. Then five potental dangerous people are left in this organization which may sell information and/or syp you. (NSA has at the moment problems with just one - Mr Edward Snowden)
Maybe I'm paranoid, but one person in Nepal which could be prosecuted because of the wrong interests is too much.
Kind Regards
Markus
|
|
|
|
|
enhzflep felt I was being rude. If I was, I apologize.
|
|
|
|
|
I just found this on another forum, and thought the warning could apply here:
Re: Do You Really Like Bacon?
I don't like bacon, I LOVE BACON. But be forewarned it will kill you. My grandad, in his daily breakfast routine would fry four strips of bacon, then fry two eggs in the bacon grease, sometimes he would take what grease the eggs didn't absorb and pour it over two pieces of slightly burnt toast, sprinkled with powder sugar. This was his breakfast up until it cut him down in the prime of life. He had so much to live for, so much too offer, and bacon "dun kilt him". He was but a spry young man of only 92 years young when bacon crept in and quietly killed him while he was sleeping. Eat this stuff if you must, but don't say you weren't warned.
I tried to warn you, really I did!
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Them old country folk live on lard and crew backy and they live forever!
|
|
|
|
|
Yep... It was posted on a redneck site, devoted to guns and reloading. Those guys live forever, though people who piss them off don't fare so well... 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
What happens in the hills, stays in the hills.
|
|
|
|
|
|
sound of banjos playing...
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Squeal like a ... ooo bacon.
|
|
|
|
|
Cholesterol is the protective coating on every cell in your body. Your brain is mostly water, cholesterol, and saturated fat...
My point being... umm... not sure, but I eat bacon, I fry sandwiches in bacon, I save lard, tallow, and the like for food when I'm stuck with a dry piece of meat or something like that.
I have far fewer health problems than my genetically similar brothers.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
