News Clipping

Google claims it doesn’t understand what Do Not Track means


Mon, May 23, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    Google claims it doesn’t understand what Do Not Track  means

    I’ve just seen what has to be the lamest excuse ever to come out of the Googleplex. Apparently Google hasn’t implemented a Do Not Track mechanism on its Chrome browser, because, according to one of the Internet Giant’s top privacy lawyers, Keith Enright, the geeks in Mountain View “need more granularity and a more reasonable understanding of what it means to honor [Do Not Track] in a meaningful way.”

    It’s really very simple, Do Not Track means just what it says. When  a consumer sends that message to a website, he or she means it.  Don’t gather my information and follow me around the web and snoop on my browsing habits.  That’s clear, isn’t it?

    The other three major browsers have figured out that the ability to send a Do Not Track message is something that consumers want.  Mozilla’s Firefox, Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and Apple’s Safari will all offer a feature that would enable the unambiguous Do Not Track message to be sent.

    The problem, of course, is that there is no requirement that websites honor the requests.  That’s where legislation comes in.  In the the House, Rep. Jackie Speier has introduced a Do Not Track bill. In the Senate Sen. Jay Rockefeller has a Do Not Track bill.  In California, Sen Alan Lowenthal has offered a bill that would cover companies doing business in the state.

    The federal bills give the Federal Trade Commission ample authority to draw Do Not Track regulations so that they allow common business practices to continue. The California bill authorizes the attorney general to draw up these regulations.

    There is absolutely no reason for Google to muddle the issue by claiming they don’t know what Do Not Track means. How could they not know? Tracking is what their entire business model is based upon.  Snooping on our online activities and monetizing us, their users.

    , , , , , ,

    Leave a Reply

    ルイヴィトンは旅行の芸術なので、ルイヴィトンは比較的人気の高いブランドで、現在は手動で機械的に混合してパッケージングを行っています。 ルイヴィトンiphoneケースの海外での価格は、国民に比較的近いです。 しかし、エルメスは異なっています。馬が馬を生産するのは初めてです。そのため、エルメスは主に手作りの芸術であり、一般的な意味では贅沢ではありません。 エルメスiphoneケースのすべての製品は、芸術作品として楽しんで保存することができます。 ルイ?ヴィトンは、価格面ではルイ?ヴィトンよりもはるかに高いですが、質の面ではそれほど優れているわけではありませんが、近年では生産の増加により衰退の兆しが見えてきました。 最も顕著なパフォーマンスは、ブランド携帯ケース伝統的に手作業で加工された部品の多くが現在機械加工されていることです。加工の質は向上しますが、機械と労働は必ずしも成績ではありません。