Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Twitter News Your Rights Online

Twitter Confirms Support For Do Not Track 33

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the pinky-swear dept.
oyenamit writes "In a significant boost to online privacy, Twitter has announced that they will officially support the Do Not Track feature in browsers. While this is a good news for privacy advocates and users in general, it leaves Twitter to use only the information that is handed over to them by the users for advertising purposes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Twitter Confirms Support For Do Not Track

Comments Filter:
  • who's next ? is this feat supported in mobile browsers too ? Else I fear I have to warmup my chrooted rootfs on device : http://rzr.online.fr/q/ubuntu [online.fr] :-)
  • As it should be... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 19, 2012 @06:03PM (#40054033)

    If people want to provide their information in exchange for targeted advertising and such, so be it.

    To amass tons of personal information on people without their knowledge or consent should be the exception to the rule (broken by only the most disreputable of online operators), not the rule itself.

    Also, hurray for Firefox, a driving force in protection of privacy and browser customization. :)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 19, 2012 @06:03PM (#40054037)

    By for example not storing cookies, not running javascripts from tracking sites, not loading web bugs, and if you really want to be careful, surfing through a proxy. RequestPolicy helps a lot too.

    Anything else is just an illusion that will lull the less tech literate into a false sense of security. Sure, a few sites may honor some DNT sent from your browser, but you'll never know which don't, and if laws require it, the tracking will just be pushed outside the USA e.g, outside the jurisdiction of those laws. And if any sites don't, then you STILL have the original problem: you're being tracked. Unless this reaches 100% support among all web sites in all countries, it's useless, because your browser not leaking the data in the first place is still the only way to avoid being tracked.

    If you don't want sites tracking you, don't leak information they can track! Otherwise you're just fooling yourself. And for the love of christ, don't use google or facebook or load any of their tracking crap that's spewed all around the web these days.

    • by ickleberry (864871) <web@pineapple.vg> on Saturday May 19, 2012 @06:16PM (#40054087) Homepage
      DNT gives sites the opportunity to *let on* they don't track people.

      You'd have to be naive as fcuk to believe what some company claims to do in their legalese wall of text privacy policy has much bearing on what actually goes on.
      • by thsths (31372)

        > DNT gives sites the opportunity to *let on* they don't track people.

        Not as I understand it, and that is the main flow of DNT. It gives the use the opportunity to express a preference, which is great. But if they website does not support DNT, this preference is just ignored. There should be a way to block sites that do not support DNT.

        Of course you still have a point, and Google says the same: we should not trust websites. The browser should enforce privacy is much as desired and possible. But once peop

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Reminder that Google, who makes its money from ad tracking, remains the last browser vendor to not natively support DNT.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 19, 2012 @09:27PM (#40054855)

      If the browser fed the trackers completely false and misleading information information, that would be the worst thing imaginable for them, and best for me. Scripts, Java and cookies could all be intercepted , and crap or carefully crafted false data feed back.

      I will pay handsomely for the first app to tease and conspire against tracking sites to feed them complete crap, and spoil their leads database and expensive marketing campaigns. Better would be to dynamically offer competing site 'B', or give a popup saying oh 'Porn Subscription Advertising popup blocked - IP info of Senator xxxxxx at the White-house has been substituted and subscribed.

      The false email names and addresses I give out make it abundantly clear they have been duded. Advertisers would soon figure out they are paying $100's or $1000's for crap leads. Technology has not (yet) been used to counter the problem.

      One big problem remains. Use Ebay or Amazon to look at pregnancy test kits or baby clothes, and you mailbox becomes stuffed - even if your address begins with 'White Lady Funeral Crematorium', as do new car brochures. Lots of stock paper for burning...

  • by kenh (9056) on Saturday May 19, 2012 @06:05PM (#40054043) Homepage Journal

    I thought the whole point of Twitter was to collect followers? Maybe they could launch a new service for those folks that want to share intimate stories but not have anyone read it - I even have the perfect name for it - "/dev/null"

    • Twitter doesn't need to know the address of every page you visit just to publish your coments.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    IMO "Do Not Track" is stupid.

    If you don't want to be tracked, use The Tor Browser Bundle.

  • double standards (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    "...it leaves Twitter to use only the information that is handed over to them by the users for advertising purposes."

    THIS IS A BAD THING???!!!!???

    Most everyone on this site complains how much is being collected. A company decides not to collect information from unwilling and unsuspecting people and all the comments are negative. Maybe the US Government is right in collecting all they can. People don't seem to know what they want anyway.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Scorpion confirms support for do-not-sting; Frogs everywhere rejoice.
    Drowning at eleven.

  • Is it bad to collect page views, time on site, page depth (how many pages viewed), load time, etc?

    Cookies are used to "track" you on every website that uses any typical analytics package.

    Where do we draw the line between looking at whether a site is functioning as intended vs. invasion of privacy?

    If I want to see load times for repeat visitors (to look at the impact of cache settings) visitors have to be assigned a UID that persists for days/weeks at least. No, test sessions are not useful. I need aggregate

  • So what changed? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Altanar (56809) on Saturday May 19, 2012 @11:53PM (#40055315)
    Has Twitter *ever* used direct browser data to advertise? I thought 100% of their business model was giving paid suggestions depending on your public tweets and follow list. The DNT toggle won't change that. They're essentially not changing anything. It's not like Twitter has regular ads on the site. They're all paid stream inserts and paid trending topics. The paid inserts have never been based off a cookie or off-site browser behavior.
    • by vmlemon (1203598)
      They display adverts to users who have their interface language set to Japanese - but I don't know what their return on investment is. Most of them seem to be for cosmetics, TV shows, restaurants, and weird racing events (and have no bearing on what a user Tweets about), anyway.
  • The tools are there for those who want. And it doesn't take much work to use them.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the demigodic party. -- Dennis Ritchie

Working...