Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
ypolicyblog.com
Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
1–10 of 96 posts
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#2They key thing to understand is that if IE10 did not have DNT enabled, that the default setting would be _just as arbitrary_ and would still therefore not "map to user intent" in their words. There has to be a default in one direction or the other.
That, and many users will use IE10 knowing that it ships with DNT pre-enabled. To ignore this is totally immoral and unethical. This is totally shameful.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#3They key thing to understand is that if IE10 did not have DNT enabled, that the default setting would be _just as arbitrary_ and would still therefore not "map to user intent" in their words. There has to be a default in one direction or the other. That, and many users will use IE10 knowing that it ships with DNT pre-enabled. To ignore this is totally immoral and unethical. This is totally shameful.
Yeah. Anyone who reads the default settings summary in the OOBE (out-of-box experience) in Windows 8 will be aware it's enabled.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#4They key thing to understand is that if IE10 did not have DNT enabled, that the default setting would be _just as arbitrary_ and would still therefore not "map to user intent" in their words. There has to be a default in one direction or the other. That, and many users will use IE10 knowing that it ships with DNT pre-enabled. To ignore this is totally immoral and unethical. This is totally shameful.
>They key thing to understand is that if IE10 did not have DNT enabled, that the default setting would be _just as arbitrary_ and would still therefore not "map to user intent" in their words. There has to be a default in one direction or the other.
The default is to send a null value in the header meaning that no intent has been expressed, that's not arbitrary.
> That, and many users will use IE10 knowing that it ships with DNT pre-enabled. To ignore this is totally immoral and unethical. This is totally shameful.
Most users will have no idea what DNT is, nor will they bother to switch the flag. MS setting it to do not track by default undermines the effort being put into the standard. No one is going to comply with a voluntary standard if one of the largest browser vendors turns it on by default.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#5They key thing to understand is that if IE10 did not have DNT enabled, that the default setting would be _just as arbitrary_ and would still therefore not "map to user intent" in their words. There has to be a default in one direction or the other. That, and many users will use IE10 knowing that it ships with DNT pre-enabled. To ignore this is totally immoral and unethical. This is totally shameful.
Nope. For the past 10-20 years, browsing has worked as if there were not a DNT signal. So clearly "default off" is not "just as arbitrary". Yahoo is right.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#6They key thing to understand is that if IE10 did not have DNT enabled, that the default setting would be _just as arbitrary_ and would still therefore not "map to user intent" in their words. There has to be a default in one direction or the other. That, and many users will use IE10 knowing that it ships with DNT pre-enabled. To ignore this is totally immoral and unethical. This is totally shameful.
Yeah. Anyone who reads the default settings summary in the OOBE (out-of-box experience) in Windows 8 will be aware it's enabled.
In other words, almost no one will know. The thing is most people don't take the time to read those things they just click through blindly.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#7Took me a second to figure out this whole DNT business.
So basically it is just an HTTP header your browser sends to the server that tells it not to track. Seems kind of like the wrong way to do it. If I was some nefarious website wouldn't I have straight up ignore it? There isn't any incentive for me to not track a user. In fact aren't a lot of companies around advertising based on the fact that you CAN track users?
More info here: http://donottrack.us/
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#8To be honest, i actually don't care if yahoo tracks me on yahoo properties - in fact, i expect them to. What i DO NOT want is for them to track me across the entire internet through injected javascript, iframes and dedicated tracking domains that serve same-origin analytic scripts from hundreds of sites - that is unethical.
Currently using adblock plus, noscript and ghostery on my FF setup with specific additional controls in ABE for Twitter and FB domains.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#9Took me a second to figure out this whole DNT business. So basically it is just an HTTP header your browser sends to the server that tells it not to track. Seems kind of like the wrong way to do it. If I was some nefarious website wouldn't I have straight up ignore it? There isn't any incentive for me to not track a user. In fact aren't a lot of companies around advertising based on the fact that you CAN track users?…
The thing about DNT is that the advertising industry (not malicious/shady websites) are supportive of it as a voluntary standard that they will comply with it. All the major players are saying they won't play nicely with IE10 due to the default on flag instead of a default null (no intent expressed) flag.
Re: Yahoo to ignore IE10's "Do Not Track"
#10This is surprising, given that Microsoft is the provider of ads on Yahoo Search (and perhaps other properties).