3 ms·
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.
by ktsmith 14y ago
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.
- jlarocco 14y agoIn other words meaning they're not going to support it... "We're only going to support it if it's not turned on by default" is not really supporting DNT. It really shows they're business model depends on people being computer illiterate. And now that DNT is on by default they're revolting because they know few people will ever go out of their way to opt-in and get tracked.
- ktsmith 14y ago> "We're only going to support it if it's not turned on by default" No, they are only going to support it if it is _actually_ the users intent, not a vendors intent. This is completely reasonable and the actions of MS are undermining the efforts to get this voluntary standard going. Keep in mind, DNT is completely voluntary.
- jlarocco 14y agoOne could just as easily argue that a user should only be tracked if it's their explicit intent to be tracked, in which case DNT should be on unless the user turns it off. That makes more sense to me, and I think a lot of people would agree. Obviously, Microsoft thinks that should be the case.
- ktsmith 14y agoI have a hard time believing MS is doing this for their users benefit. It seems much more likely they think this will hurt Google.
- jlarocco 14y agoNext you'll tell me corporations mainly donate to charity for tax purposes and free publicity... I don't care if they're really doing it to hurt Google. Increased privacy for users is a good thing.
- waterlesscloud 14y agoWhat method are they using to determine if it's _actually_ the user's intent?
- dialtone 14y agoYou have to explicitly set it on, that means the user had to take a specific action, and that means there was an intent to do it.
- ktsmith 14y agoThere are three values that the header can contain. null - no value set 0 - opted in to tracking 1 - opted out of tracking A 0 or 1 imply intent and null would imply the user has taken no action.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- brigade 14y agoYou can waffle all you want about user intent, but it's quite obvious that they will only support an opt-out scheme. Advertising almost never implement opt-in unless legally forced to.
- jfoster 14y agoOne could also argue that Microsoft is not being pragmatic in expecting these companies to continue to honour it if it is on by default. At least when it is off by default, it will be honoured if a user opts to turn it on.
- ktsmith 14y agoI agree, additionally it's not even really "off" by default. The default in the spec right now is a null value which indicates "we don't know" which is actually accurate until the user makes a choice.
- w1ntermute 14y agoDoesn't that make sense? If someone doesn't care enough to go in and turn on DNT, why does it matter if they're tracked? The default should obviously be 'null', that's the most equitable choice for all parties involved.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- wpietri 14y agoBecause ignorance doesn't equal informed consent.