Internet Explorer 10 to Have 'Do Not Track' as Default

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I DO PAY for some news service! I would not mind at all to pay to see or access some sites. they would have to be better quality.
If you would to be paying to access this site, the quality would improve for sure. Everyone complains about the quality of some articles and that is about one thing, they do not require YOUR Money to write them. if you were to be paid for the quality of your articles, instead of the quantity, the whole site yould be better oriented to its croud, and i mean "iT" FANS!
I do think before I talk, and i know what i'm saying. You need to do the same, or in case you're having doubt's, ASK BEFORE YOU ASSUME ME WRONG!
 
WSJ reports that the industry agreed to honor "do not track" as long as it is not a default setting
Click to expand...
To get past this, the first time you open the browser you are met with the following statement and two option:-

Do you want this browser to NOT track your movements
or
Do you want this browser to track everything you do, everywhere you go, everything you see and feed it back to whoever wants to use it, be that to determine potential criminal behaviour, spy your porn habits, view you credit card information or anything you either purchase or browse on any site that sells anything so that the rest of your life your email, texts, Twitter and Facebook are spammed with endless adverts for penis pills, cheap loans or the latest Nigerian Bank scam.

Yes
...
No

...............................

I think that would sort out the agreement for default, as it's now down to user choice...
 
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]So where is Tom's Hardware going to get their cash? Advertising is a necessary evil for websites that don't rely on purchases or heavy donations.I don't mind ads, but hate content heavy ads that bog down on page loads. I'll turn off my Adblock Plus for a website if the ads are light.[/citation]


Most people who read Tom's right now do not see adds. That's simply the reality of the situation.

As for how Tom's will survive.... like it always did by pushing products. Pretty obvious really.
 
I think a few people are having trouble with their negatives...

Turning off Do Not Track means allowing advertisers to track you.

Turning it ON is what you want to do.
 
Chew on this: TV is paid for by advertising. Does TV need to spy on you and track you in order to make money through advertising? NO, of course not.

Maybe the Obama admistration should outlaw tracking in general, there's no reason why Newegg can't pay Tom's Hardware to place a jpeg advertisement on the page WITHOUT then having to place 20 cookies on your machine and execute a bunch of javascript and flash that will then track everywhere else you go.

spying != advertising

, you can advertise without spying.

*the first person to ever think of that idea*
 
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]So where is Tom's Hardware going to get their cash? Advertising is a necessary evil for websites that don't rely on purchases or heavy donations.I don't mind ads, but hate content heavy ads that bog down on page loads. I'll turn off my Adblock Plus for a website if the ads are light.[/citation]
With noscript I can trust a site if I wish. I guess this will be the case with IE10 to only allow sites you trust. I trust tomshardware so its all good. This will have a big negative effect on those sites no one trusts but often gets mistake hits. The phisher, keylogger, and spyware sites are the big reason you want this protection.
 
[citation][nom]Razor512[/nom]I wonder how much additional bandwidth overhead is added when you ass the extra content needed for the do not track header which as we all know, will be promptly ignored by any site you go to?[/citation]

It's a six byte HTTP header field. So every 171 links you click it will use 1KB of upload bandwidth. It's a negligible amount in every context.
 
[citation][nom]southernshark[/nom]Most people who read Tom's right now do not see adds. That's simply the reality of the situation.As for how Tom's will survive.... like it always did by pushing products. Pretty obvious really.[/citation]I allow ads on purpose on most sites I frequent. I want them to survive. Pretty obvious really.

But they don't need to know where I've been and all that, to deliver more targeting advertising. As others have said, there are ads in other mediums (TV, Radio, Print) that don't require tracking. They know site content, common reader traits, and apparent location of most visitors (IP address). That's just as much as other mediums, and that's good enough.
 
[citation][nom]alextheblue[/nom]I allow ads on purpose on most sites I frequent. I want them to survive. Pretty obvious really.But they don't need to know where I've been and all that, to deliver more targeting advertising. As others have said, there are ads in other mediums (TV, Radio, Print) that don't require tracking. They know site content, common reader traits, and apparent location of most visitors (IP address). That's just as much as other mediums, and that's good enough.[/citation]
Personally, I block 3rd party cookies, ads, and all tracking and ad scripts. However, if ads were just static images or text, didn't track me AT ALL, and I didn't get any redirects to ad pages, ads showing up IN MY FACE, ads that are animated in an annoying way, or ads with noise, I wouldn't have a problem allowing them. Of course, since advertisers want to make their ads annoying and privacy invading, guess what you get? Nothing.

I tried using flash block, but then websites try to load flash ads, only to be blocked. The only way to get static ads it seems is to disable flash altogether, but that breaks some video sites. (It's actually not that bad, except for ad-supported youtube videos. Come on, I'm going to block the ads anyway, so what's the point?)
 
[citation][nom]dntunlessyoupayusafatstack[/nom]Meh. Anybody who doesn't think that this "on by default" will somehow acquire "exceptions" by way of cash payments from big advertisers is a FOOL who's unaware of Microsoft's track record.[/citation]

The most well known ad blocker already makes exceptions, so Microsoft would not be doing anything new by doing the same (just perhaps for different reasons).
 
[citation][nom]trakcing_u[/nom]Chew on this: TV is paid for by advertising. Does TV need to spy on you and track you in order to make money through advertising? NO, of course not.Maybe the Obama admistration should outlaw tracking in general, there's no reason why Newegg can't pay Tom's Hardware to place a jpeg advertisement on the page WITHOUT then having to place 20 cookies on your machine and execute a bunch of javascript and flash that will then track everywhere else you go.spying != advertising, you can advertise without spying.*the first person to ever think of that idea*[/citation]
Dude, the newegg cookies show your recently browsed newegg items and it's pretty cool. It doesn't matter about tracking...you still get ads either way...lol...
 
Lots of gullible people, here: "Look, IE is great as it cares about my privacy!"

Since Microsoft is next to nothing in the online ads business, this is just an unsubtle way to strike Google.
 
Quoted from http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Microsoft_Windows

"The developers at Microsoft were crazy to think Internet Explorer would also be praised for being totally incompatible with most websites, as well as completely vulnerable to spyware, adware, and viruses. That, and it was slow as fuck, even if you had a connection that was fast with other browsers like Safari, Opera and Firefox, which is not a steaming pile of dog feces. Also, IE's pop-up blocker only works at stopping pop-ups only when you completely meant to open it."
 
What? lol i can't anymore. I tried, it takes you to that IE gallery, and there's no google search anymore.


UPDATE: I got it now. I have to change the location settings from India to the US, then only do i see the Google search provider option.

Not my fault really 😛
 
I like the idea of having DNT on by default. I don't want advertisers to track me and attempt so called personalized ads for me. I may click an ad but that doesn't mean I would actually buy the stuff, it just had something I found interesting. Take for instance my family members who use Facebook, they "like" classic cars and end up getting all kinds of ads for crap they'd never buy. This is similar to what DNT would stop, it doesn't mean sites wouldn't have advertising, they just wouldn't be able to track your browsing habits and show you crap you don't want in the first place.

[citation][nom]JohnnyLucky[/nom]I like the DNT feature.There are inherent problems with tracking. For example, a surfer visits a web site featuring clothing. Later the surfer visits a web site featuring automobiles. As a result of tracking the automobile site will have an ad for clothing from the clothing site. It is the wrong ad on the wrong site. It would be more appropriate to have ads that correspond to a site's content.[/citation]

So are you saying that if I view a site that has Leather Motorcycle clothing, and then I visit say the Harley Davidson site that having ads for clothing is is on the wrong site? Sure some clothing would definitely be on the wrong site but some is appropriate to the site your viewing. It's up to the advertising people to figure that out. It's bad enough that I get tracked every time I go out in the real world and buy stuff at stores like Walmart and Target, I don't need to be tracked online. Seriously who here wants to be tracked while your surfing for pron?
 
i have pop ups disabled and cookies disabled, i set everything to deny deny deny deny no matter who it's from.
until advertisers pay me i am not giving them anything for free.
advertisers could also make us more likely to allow tracking if they gave us top notch antivirus software for free.
 
I applaud the effort by M$. I think it's the right thing to do and I think it's long overdue. People, we are not talking about disabling advertising on web sites, it will simply not tell the ad makers where you go and what you do on the internet. It's none of their business. It's advertisers being lazy. Instead of targeting the web site for what they sell (i.e. Motorcycle related ads on motorcycle enthusiast sites) they want their ad to follow you wherever you go.

I approach the whole ad thing like this. The more annoying the ad, the LESS LIKELY I AM TO BUY IT! See, quite simple and if most people approached it like that, the annoying ads would disappear like mists in the sunshine.
 
Excellent. IE8 started the trend of 64bit native browsers and IE9 continued on the path with stronger security by default than competing browsers. Looking forward to the day when privacy on the web returns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom