CNET, IDC Find Rapid Increase In Behavioral Data Tracking 88
retroworks writes "According to columnist Elinor Mills at CNET, efforts to track consumer browsing behavior are 'rising dramatically.' In an interview with Gordon McLeod, CEO of data mining company Krux.com, advertising targeted at browsing habits has increased fourfold since 2010. IDC, according to McLeod, projects the browser-search-term-targeted advertising industry to grow from 'zero to $5 billion in less than 5 years.' Will health insurance companies see us crawling for information on family illnesses? After reading the article, I went hunting for a download of 2008 program antiphormlite, and found nothing remaining at any download site (including CNET). Is there another 'cookie camouflage' alternative to polluting the cookie stream with false positives? Or are we left to 'do not track' pledges and trusting Tor redirectors?"
Re:Don't accept cookies. (Score:5, Interesting)
Can "other trackers like pixels, scripts" track actual identifying data? I don't know enough about this stuff to know.
And if I can remain anonymous enough, should I still care if data is collected?
I run ghostery but I really need to pay more attention to this stuff and educate myself about incognito/private browsing. Not so much that I browse somewhere illegal or that my crazy leftwing politics are going to get me in trouble, but I really can't stand the idea of data tracking.
I would gladly give up all the "benefits" that come with data tracking. But then, I thought the internet was just great in 1993, before the commercialization of the Internet. I would love to have seen how the Internet would have developed if it hadn't become a sleazy shopping mall/TV combo.
I really like this idea of "cookie camouflage". I never heard of this "antiphormlite" program before today. Too bad it seems to have been disappeared. I would enjoy showing these trackers the back of my hand.
noscript?? (Score:4, Interesting)