3 ms·

I spend a lot of time analyzing my own logs. I get a lot of value from it. I am completely cool with someone analyzing their own logs if I visit their site.

I spend a lot of time analyzing my own logs. I get a lot of value from it. I am completely cool with someone analyzing their own logs if I visit their site. What I'm not cool with, is them finding out what _other_ sites I visit. I regard the current focus on analytics as unduly obsessive. How much do you need to know about your customer to flog your products? Just because you can measure something, it doesn't mean that it's going to do anyone any good to measure it. I used to do direct mail; all we ever did was what today is known as A/B testing - we'd send "test drops" to different lists, with different prices, different wording in the offer letters and so on. It worked really well.

pdkl95 12y ago
To clarify my previous post, I'm totally fine with server-logs. As the 2nd-party to the conversation, the server has to know who the request is from, and can log it. These logs can certainly provide a lot of value. As you mention, I'm more concerned with tracking as a 3rd-party[1]. There is, obviously, at least some real benefit in these cases that would not be possible when only using server logs. It's probably a lot less than most people think. A lot of that data (or similar-enough data when measured in e.g. how much it benefits sales or makes marketing cheaper) can probably be found elsewhere. If we knew what the core benefits (needs, not wants), we might (in an ideal world) even be able to have some sort of social negotiation where the data can be provided in some form (or an alternative, or by making sure the real social cost is covered properly). [1] While the law currently doesn't work this way, involving a 3rd-party unauthorized should really be considered some new type of (criminal) wiretapping in states that require 2-party consent.
- asuffield 12y ago
  > A lot of that data (or similar-enough data when measured in e.g. how much it benefits sales or makes marketing cheaper) can probably be found elsewhere. If you can find equivalent data somewhere else, you should go build a company around this. People built their products this way because it works. If you have a better idea then you should make it happen.

pdkl95 12y ago

To clarify my previous post, I'm totally fine with server-logs. As the 2nd-party to the conversation, the server has to know who the request is from, and can log it. These logs can certainly provide a lot of value. As you mention, I'm more concerned with tracking as a 3rd-party[1]. There is, obviously, at least some real benefit in these cases that would not be possible when only using server logs. It's probably a lot less than most people think. A lot of that data (or similar-enough data when measured in e.g. how much it benefits sales or makes marketing cheaper) can probably be found elsewhere. If we knew what the core benefits (needs, not wants), we might (in an ideal world) even be able to have some sort of social negotiation where the data can be provided in some form (or an alternative, or by making sure the real social cost is covered properly). [1] While the law currently doesn't work this way, involving a 3rd-party unauthorized should really be considered some new type of (criminal) wiretapping in states that require 2-party consent.

asuffield 12y ago
> A lot of that data (or similar-enough data when measured in e.g. how much it benefits sales or makes marketing cheaper) can probably be found elsewhere. If you can find equivalent data somewhere else, you should go build a company around this. People built their products this way because it works. If you have a better idea then you should make it happen.