Automatically playing sound and video on a web page does break a social contract. But since when do advertisers care about such things?
When I visit a site and it has video playing, even silent video, I am done with that site. Or at the very least with that page view.
The ironic thing is that the web site operator and the advertiser incorrectly believes a good thing just happened -- an ad impression. It was an 'impression' alright, but not the kind they were wanting. It made me less likely to ever visit their site again. More likely to attempt to block it in any way possible. Etc. This builds up over time until they wonder what happened?
Web sites that start putting product placement within their content soon become the ones that I stop visiting once it becomes obnoxious enough. If I were looking for what the advertiser was selling, I can easily find the companies that are selling what I want to buy. And, like Netflix, when I WANT IT, not when the advertiser wants it. And on the device I want it. And where I want it.
And product placements in TV? I mentioned in a previous TD post that the remaining two TV programs I was watching a few years ago, on CBS, I quit watching due to horrible product placement. It just ruined the show, so I quit watching. I hope CBS is happy with the result. At least I am. So now I watch no network TV at all. Or cable.
Netflix and Hulu work great without ads.
As for product placements in Movies? The new Star Wars movie was the first movie I had seen at a theater in quite a long time. I didn't seem to notice any product placements for space craft or space suits, or particular brands of light sabers. My family and I booked our tickets weeks in advance, and then saw the movie several times, including the opening night showing. And bought opening night T-shirts, etc.
I might be part of an attractive demographic to advertisers -- but I can't stand advertisers and have a violently revolting reaction towards them.
The fact that there were some ads before the movie reinforced my extreme reluctance to attend movie theaters.
As for TechDirt having promotional ads and content, I don't mind that. It is a direct, honest and straightforward approach.
They know the internet. The problem the recognize is that is a large and expensive effort to police the internet. So they want someone else to do it for them. For free.
And it's even more expensive to have actual due process. Let alone actually go after the sites hosting the infringing content. So they'll just go after only one of several search engines instead.
And then each time they make record breaking profits, they'll whine about how piracy is destroying their business. As artists receive little to nothing.
This PDF describes how an organized crime ring was busted that was successfully counterfeiting the secure chip credit cards.
While the technique of how the FUN chips were overlaid onto the legitimate chips is fascinating itself, I want to point out part of how the criminals were caught.
See the top of page 3:
Because transactions take place at well-defined geographic locations and at well-defined moments in time, intersecting the IMSIs 6 of SIM cards present near the crime scenes immediately revealed the perpetrators’ SIM card details. A 25 years old woman was subsequently identified and arrested, while carrying a large number of cigarette packs and scratch games. Such larceny was the fraudsters’ main target, as they resold these goods on the black market.
Investigators quickly put a name on most of the gang members. Four were arrested, including the engineer who created the fake cards. Arrests occurred in the French cities of Ezanville, Auchy-les-Mines and Rouvroy. About 25 stolen cards were seized, as well as specialized software and e 5000 in cash.
So let me see if I got this right.
They can take the time the credit card transaction was made, and correlate it with all cell phones that were physically present in the area. Then repeat this for several different transactions. This helps them quickly narrow down the individuals who are consistently present when the forged card is used.
By driving your car, you make your location available to license plate readers.
Everyone knows this is possible. But shouldn't you still have an expectation of being able to freely and privately move about unless there is some other reason to suspect you of a crime? Just like the location of your cell phone.
Also, these days, anyone can build a license plate reader using the Open CV library. You might not have the license plate registration data, but it might be surprising the amount of data that a non-police user of such a tool could amass over time. A large database of where license plates were spotted correlated with GPS location.
Maybe Google cars should collect license plate data? Advertisers would love to know that, your plate is frequently parked at your house, but then you also visit certain competitor's stores that the advertiser could try to entice you away from and into their store. On the surface it seems legit enough. But it would become a privacy nightmare.
Not having a cell phone should make you automatically suspicious. Only a terrorist would evade suspicion by trying to keep the government from knowing every last tiny detail of their intimate lives.
Similarly, trying to avoid breaking the law is a sure sign that you are trying to look as though you are not a criminal.
For example, if you don't steal a car, you are obviously trying to mislead and deceive police into thinking you are not a car thief.
You have no expectation of privacy of where you drive your car to.
Everyone knows that police use license plate readers and maintain detailed and probably permanent records of every time their system has observed your car.
I'm sure quite a history could be learned about you.
And your car might be keeping tabs on how you drive.
I suppose the thing is, SHOULD we be able to have a reasonable expectation of privacy. I believe we should. But judges will believe otherwise, because this privacy invading data is so darn valuable to would be tyrants.
Judge says people have no expectation of privacy from their TV taking pictures of them in their home.
Everyone knows that so-called 'smart' TVs equipped with cameras for online video chatting have the capability to photograph you in your own home, any time, all the time and upload these images to the mother ship.
Therefore you have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Should we talk about laptop cameras and microphones?
Bandai Namco, here is how to do it right. Take a lesson from Microsoft® which first demonstrated how to trademark the words Word®, and Excel®.
Instead of obtaining a trademark for Finishing Move, you should first trademark Finishing™ and then a trademark on Move™. This approach will give you much greater rights than trademarking the combined Finishing Move.
Sony, similarly you should first obtain a trademark for Let's™, and then a trademark Play™.
(Notice: The words in this post may be trademarks which are owned by their respective owners. Please™ do™ appropriate™ research™ before™ using™ in™ a™ potentially™ infringing™ way™ in™ your™ own™ posts™.)
I think it was AT&T. And it was he opposite direction. They offered you a higher price if you didn't want advertising. The deep packet inspection was the default, not the 'discount'. It was the prices you had originally agreed to before they ever heard of deep packet inspection.
If I wanted to get my packets deeply inspected, I wouldn't be encrypting everything. Or I would be getting into the TSA line.
Re: Re: Governments should NOT be in the business of regulating!
On the topic of the right amount of regulation, I agree that it should always be the minimum that is necessary.
However much there is, typically is the result of regulation introduced to curb some kind of abuse. If they didn't want regulation, they shouldn't have brought it on.
If the business people could somehow manage to put themselves into other people's shoes and emphasize, regulation might never be a thing.
Governments should NOT be in the business of regulating!
Comcast is in good company here. And with good reason.
Imposing regulations upon Comcast to protect consumer privacy would be like regulating big chemical plants to prevent water pollution. Or the silly idea of regulating plants to prevent air polution! This would impose unwarranted burdensome requirements upon business that would diminish profits from huge to merely large.
Comcast shouldn't be regulated any more than other poor struggling ISPs. Imagine if Verizon had to actually build out the landline infrastructure they promised? Or if AT&T had to let customers use all the bandwidth they actually paid for? This could destroy the global economy!
Shouldn't TechDirt be a 'pro business' site?
This message brought to you by Big Lobbyist from Big Mega Corp which personally approved this message.
On the post: All Those Evil Violent Video Games Apparently Failed At Turning Kids Into Deviant Murder-Terrorists
Just wait for the next version
But just wait for version 2.0. They'll get it right.
The sky really will fall next time. You just wait and see. The ${left | right} political party's evil plan will work.
/s
On the post: Swedish Court: Wikipedia Hosting Photos Of Public Artwork Is Copyright Infringement For Some Reason
But Artists Need To Get Paid !
With public money?
Oh, but artists 'moral rights' are being violated.
What moral right? The right to censor a valuable database that anyone worldwide can use?
On the post: For The Fifth Time Now, German Court Says Adblocking Is Legal
Re: Tiny Violin
When I visit a site and it has video playing, even silent video, I am done with that site. Or at the very least with that page view.
The ironic thing is that the web site operator and the advertiser incorrectly believes a good thing just happened -- an ad impression. It was an 'impression' alright, but not the kind they were wanting. It made me less likely to ever visit their site again. More likely to attempt to block it in any way possible. Etc. This builds up over time until they wonder what happened?
On the post: For The Fifth Time Now, German Court Says Adblocking Is Legal
Re: Re:
And product placements in TV? I mentioned in a previous TD post that the remaining two TV programs I was watching a few years ago, on CBS, I quit watching due to horrible product placement. It just ruined the show, so I quit watching. I hope CBS is happy with the result. At least I am. So now I watch no network TV at all. Or cable.
Netflix and Hulu work great without ads.
As for product placements in Movies? The new Star Wars movie was the first movie I had seen at a theater in quite a long time. I didn't seem to notice any product placements for space craft or space suits, or particular brands of light sabers. My family and I booked our tickets weeks in advance, and then saw the movie several times, including the opening night showing. And bought opening night T-shirts, etc.
I might be part of an attractive demographic to advertisers -- but I can't stand advertisers and have a violently revolting reaction towards them.
The fact that there were some ads before the movie reinforced my extreme reluctance to attend movie theaters.
As for TechDirt having promotional ads and content, I don't mind that. It is a direct, honest and straightforward approach.
On the post: Head Of British Rights Group: Piracy Is Google's Fault Even If It's Not Actually Google's Fault
Re: Re: If you don't understand the internet
And it's even more expensive to have actual due process. Let alone actually go after the sites hosting the infringing content. So they'll just go after only one of several search engines instead.
And then each time they make record breaking profits, they'll whine about how piracy is destroying their business. As artists receive little to nothing.
On the post: Head Of British Rights Group: Piracy Is Google's Fault Even If It's Not Actually Google's Fault
Re: "Tell you what, let's compromise: We'll do things my way."
On the post: Another Federal Judge Says No Expectation Of Privacy In Cell Site Location Info Because Everyone Knows Phones Generate This Data
Cell Phone location, an investigative technique
Here is a link to download the PDF.
https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/963.pdf
This PDF describes how an organized crime ring was busted that was successfully counterfeiting the secure chip credit cards.
While the technique of how the FUN chips were overlaid onto the legitimate chips is fascinating itself, I want to point out part of how the criminals were caught.
See the top of page 3:So let me see if I got this right.
They can take the time the credit card transaction was made, and correlate it with all cell phones that were physically present in the area. Then repeat this for several different transactions. This helps them quickly narrow down the individuals who are consistently present when the forged card is used.
Interesting technique. Positive result.
But what could a tyrant use that same data for?
On the post: Another Federal Judge Says No Expectation Of Privacy In Cell Site Location Info Because Everyone Knows Phones Generate This Data
Re: And now for the million dollar question:
Everyone knows this is possible. But shouldn't you still have an expectation of being able to freely and privately move about unless there is some other reason to suspect you of a crime? Just like the location of your cell phone.
Also, these days, anyone can build a license plate reader using the Open CV library. You might not have the license plate registration data, but it might be surprising the amount of data that a non-police user of such a tool could amass over time. A large database of where license plates were spotted correlated with GPS location.
Maybe Google cars should collect license plate data? Advertisers would love to know that, your plate is frequently parked at your house, but then you also visit certain competitor's stores that the advertiser could try to entice you away from and into their store. On the surface it seems legit enough. But it would become a privacy nightmare.
On the post: Another Federal Judge Says No Expectation Of Privacy In Cell Site Location Info Because Everyone Knows Phones Generate This Data
Re:
Similarly, trying to avoid breaking the law is a sure sign that you are trying to look as though you are not a criminal.
For example, if you don't steal a car, you are obviously trying to mislead and deceive police into thinking you are not a car thief.
On the post: Another Federal Judge Says No Expectation Of Privacy In Cell Site Location Info Because Everyone Knows Phones Generate This Data
Re: The Next Step
Everyone knows that police use license plate readers and maintain detailed and probably permanent records of every time their system has observed your car.
I'm sure quite a history could be learned about you.
And your car might be keeping tabs on how you drive.
I suppose the thing is, SHOULD we be able to have a reasonable expectation of privacy. I believe we should. But judges will believe otherwise, because this privacy invading data is so darn valuable to would be tyrants.
On the post: Another Federal Judge Says No Expectation Of Privacy In Cell Site Location Info Because Everyone Knows Phones Generate This Data
The Next Step
Everyone knows that so-called 'smart' TVs equipped with cameras for online video chatting have the capability to photograph you in your own home, any time, all the time and upload these images to the mother ship.
Therefore you have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Should we talk about laptop cameras and microphones?
On the post: Terabyte-Sized 'Panama Papers' Leak Confirms The Continuing Rise Of The Super-Whistleblowers
Re: Who's to blame?
On the post: 71% Want The Dark Net Shut Down, Showing Most Have No Idea What The Dark Net Is
Winning the war of words
The Light Net.
The Enlightened Net.
The Freedom Network.
The Uncensored Network.
Etc.
On the post: Bandai Namco Is Apparently Looking To Trademark The Term 'Finishing Move'
How to do it right
Instead of obtaining a trademark for Finishing Move, you should first trademark Finishing™ and then a trademark on Move™. This approach will give you much greater rights than trademarking the combined Finishing Move.
Sony, similarly you should first obtain a trademark for Let's™, and then a trademark Play™.
(Notice: The words in this post may be trademarks which are owned by their respective owners. Please™ do™ appropriate™ research™ before™ using™ in™ a™ potentially™ infringing™ way™ in™ your™ own™ posts™.)
On the post: Comcast Thinks Having Basic Broadband Privacy Protections 'Irrational'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Opt out, isn't informed consent.
If I wanted to get my packets deeply inspected, I wouldn't be encrypting everything. Or I would be getting into the TSA line.
On the post: Comcast Thinks Having Basic Broadband Privacy Protections 'Irrational'
Re: Re: Governments should NOT be in the business of regulating!
However much there is, typically is the result of regulation introduced to curb some kind of abuse. If they didn't want regulation, they shouldn't have brought it on.
If the business people could somehow manage to put themselves into other people's shoes and emphasize, regulation might never be a thing.
On the post: Comcast Thinks Having Basic Broadband Privacy Protections 'Irrational'
Re: Opt out, isn't informed consent.
On the post: Comcast Thinks Having Basic Broadband Privacy Protections 'Irrational'
Governments should NOT be in the business of regulating!
Imposing regulations upon Comcast to protect consumer privacy would be like regulating big chemical plants to prevent water pollution. Or the silly idea of regulating plants to prevent air polution! This would impose unwarranted burdensome requirements upon business that would diminish profits from huge to merely large.
Comcast shouldn't be regulated any more than other poor struggling ISPs. Imagine if Verizon had to actually build out the landline infrastructure they promised? Or if AT&T had to let customers use all the bandwidth they actually paid for? This could destroy the global economy!
Shouldn't TechDirt be a 'pro business' site?
This message brought to you by Big Lobbyist from Big Mega Corp which personally approved this message.
On the post: Stupid Patent Of The Month: Mega-Troll Intellectual Ventures Hits Florist With Do-It-On-A-Computer Scheduling Patent
Intellectual Ventures changes it's name
Intellectual Vultures
On the post: Appeals Court Says Indiana's Bad Anti-Texting Law Can't Be Used To Justify Stops Or Searches
Frnds Don't Let Frnds Txt N Drv
(but your honor! I was not texting and driving! I was updating my facebook status which is far more important than texting.)
Next >>