Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

Amazon Search Bar Will Track Your Browsing 236

Limit writes "There has been a lot of discussion regarding GMail and Google's privacy policies. However, with the recent debut of Amazon's A9.com, I havn't seen any mention to the information they intend to collect. I saw this article today, "The history server stores -- on our servers -- your history of interaction with us for the purpose of bringing that back to you in a very convenient way ... If you install the toolbar, then all your Web browsing, as well as all your searching, is stored as well." Where is all the media hype about this privacy issue?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Search Bar Will Track Your Browsing

Comments Filter:
  • Well... (Score:5, Funny)

    by daishin ( 753851 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:04AM (#8891439) Homepage
    If they see me browsing freshmeat.net, and sourceforge all the time will they send me free stuff?
  • A9 (Score:5, Funny)

    by swordboy ( 472941 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:05AM (#8891440) Journal
    Is anyone reminded of asinine [reference.com] when reading A9? I think that we should officially coin the term and use it until asinine changes their name.
    • by Glonoinha ( 587375 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:32PM (#8891892) Journal
      Not you swordboy, but everybody.
      If you install a plugin into your browser, it is tracking where you go and what you do, sending that data back to some server somewhere for processing.

      Not just Amazon. You can pretty much be sure if you have any browser bar plug-in where you type stuff and it does stuff - you are being tracked. If the one you have isn't doing it yet, the programmers are adding it for the next release.

      That is all, carry on.
      • by ccady ( 569355 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @01:21PM (#8892189) Journal

        God I love Mozilla! You want spyware free browser add-ons? Check MozDev's active projects [mozdev.org].

        Search-related projects on Mozdev
        GoogleBar [mozdev.org]- Emulates the Google toolbar that only works in IE
        Companion [mozdev.org]- Emulates the Yahoo! Companion toolbar in Mozilla.
        Easysearch [mozdev.org]- Offers a search toolbar with more general coverage of many search engines.
        ExPASybar [mozdev.org]- Searches the ExPASy database of biomolecules.
        Mycroft [mozdev.org]- Collection of search plugins for Mozilla's sidebar search (formerly known as Sherlock)
        Gimli [mozdev.org]- Another project to re-create popular toolbars, starting with a dictionary.
        NeedleSearch [mozdev.org]- Allows users to search using search engines installed in Mozilla, or add a new search string to the toolbar automatically.
        Pubmed [mozdev.org]- Searches the NLM/Medline database of articles and citations in the field of medicine.
        Qlookup [mozdev.org]- Add Google search to the context menu

  • Well I guess... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by CountBrass ( 590228 )

    No-one thought there would be much difference in having another piece of spyware on your machine. I mean 29? 30? So what. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/16/172923 8&mode=nested&tid=109&tid=126&tid=172&tid=185&tid= 187&tid=190&tid=201

  • Obvious (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Walkiry ( 698192 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:06AM (#8891444) Homepage
    Google is just a company started by a few geeks that made it big because they give an excellent service and that's it. Amazon is infested by the long tentacles of certain corporations and that's what matters to their business.

    Guess which one is going to be slammed by the "traditional media" time and again.
    • Why hasn't there been a slashdot article about the google toolbar tracking your browsing? you turn on the advanced mode and every url you go to is sent to google.
  • by blcamp ( 211756 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:06AM (#8891445) Homepage

    Seems to me that installing any third party browser add-on is only asking for trouble.

    Why add another executable that will sap some your system resources while at the same time be able to monitor your surfing habits?

    Doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me...
  • Evil Corporations (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ckwop ( 707653 ) * on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:07AM (#8891451) Homepage

    What is it about evil corporations?

    I mean, amazon already makes a $$$ off books, videos and games, so I ask why do they have to go all 1984 on us. Google have some kind of legitimate excuse already in that advertising is the only real way for google to make money.

    Is targeted advertising on the internet really worth it? I mean serious.. how much is the bad PR costing them?

    Simon

    • How does Google tracking where we browse (not what we searched on) improves advertisment revenue?

      • If you know the sites that a person visits, you can get a pretty good picture of what the person is interested in, and therefore, what advertisements he/she will respond to.

        Look at your own browser history and see if you can figure out any patterns from it. It might tell you something about yourself. The $2 question is: would you want anyone else to know that?

    • how much is the bad PR costing them

      How much do you pay Google on an annual basis?
    • by DeepDarkSky ( 111382 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:27AM (#8891561)
      Corporation are not evil per se. They exist to make money for their shareholders. They believe monitoring web browsing habits of people (who are voluntarily doing so) can better help them service their customers (only the means, not the ends) and make more money. They are doing the right thing from their perspective. They are not a totalitarian regime forcing this on everyone. Same with credit cards. If you don't want people to know what you are purchasing, use cash.

      The only bad thing about all of this tyranny of convenience is that in the future, there will be no choices, because the convenient choices come to dominate. Imagine if in the future, we can no longer pay by cash because everyone has bought into convenient cashlessness. That, is the true danger.

    • Re:Evil Corporations (Score:5, Informative)

      by shri ( 17709 ) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .cmarirhs.> on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:30AM (#8891577) Homepage
      Every commercial enterprise targets. Targetting is about making money and making money is about targetting.

      1) Malls: Malls collect information about the foot traffic, demographics and patterns of their customers. They can then position their rents according to the traffic.

      2) Retail: They use loyalty cards, store credit cards and your regular credit cards to track and profile you. They know certain products sell better a week before paychecks are due and certain products sell better the week after paychecks are cashed.

      3) CRM companies: Companies like Siebel / Onyx etc have extensive profiling options built into the software which are used my major corporations, govt groups and yes, when a sales guy finds out his customers birthday, wife's name and kid's school, he puts them in there are they're tracked.

      4) Banks: You think for a second that they don't exploit young working people who don't have enough saved up and sell them expensive credit cards?

      The list goes on ... on and on ...

      By the way, no one is brought up why my ISM using SpamAssassin is exempt from this whole invasion of privacy thingy... they have processes which reads my mail and makes certain decisions based on the content.
    • The simple answer: ordinary people don't care that much. And they won't generate bad PR.

      For instance, ordinary people have trouble finding the options to set the home page of MSIE to their liking. Everything seems too complex. Web pages are cluttered with tons of information normal people don't need. (By the way, the Google home page is a good example of design which is easy to grasp for anyone)

      Ordinary people are just glad to get away with shopping in Amazon as easy as possible. If Amazon is going to tra

  • by sgarrity ( 262297 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:07AM (#8891461) Homepage
    It's a Feature, not a Bug. Seriously though - that is partly what the search bar is for - to let you keep your search history.

    The web-search (a9.com) when you are logged in does the same.
  • by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) * on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:08AM (#8891462) Journal
    From their privacy policy on all the signup pages:

    Automatic Information: We receive and store certain types of information whenever you interact with us. For example, like many Web sites, we use cookies, and we obtain certain types of information when your Web browser accesses A9.com. Click here to see examples of the information we receive. If you would prefer not to be recognized on our site, we recommend that you use our alternate service located at generic.A9.com. On generic.A9.com, we will not recognize your A9.com or Amazon.com cookie. Information we gather on generic.A9.com will not be used in our data analysis (other than to detect abuse) and will not be used to personalize the services we offer you.


    Anyone who signs up for a "free" service without reading the small print deserves what they get, just like with any other 'unbelievably-good' offer...

    Simon.
  • dis-integration (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:08AM (#8891464) Homepage Journal
    I always want my browser to cache my Google search strings like it caches my web URLs - searching Google from my URL address field is the best Web improvement since Flash. And I want that typeahead history recall option in the address field in *all* my browsers: work, home, phone, friend's computer. So I want a server, but I want *my* server. I don't want Amazon storing it, and not just for privacy: I want all my searches, Google, Amazon, Yahoo, PriceWatch, to show up in the same address field. These competitors can't do that. But a third party can. And a third party can offer encrypted storage and transmission of my search metadata, so they can legitimately promise not to comb my personal search terms, selling me out to targetted advertisers and busybodies.
  • by PtM2300 ( 546277 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:08AM (#8891466)
    Personally, if an application can use my search records to provide me with more information I'm actually interested in, I'd welcome the oppurtunity. If anyone is concerned with privacy, they don't need to install it! I'm still waiting for the time to come when I don't have to watch tampon commercials on my television!
  • Sound off.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mean_Nishka ( 543399 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:09AM (#8891467) Homepage Journal
    You know, I'm really getting irritated over the outrage I'm seeing against VOLUNTARY web services. Personally I don't have a problem with using Gmail when it's available, nor do I care of Amazon tracks my searches if it makes for a better and more efficient web experience.

    People are going crazy over this stuff, but they forget the fact that these services are not required. If you're paranoid and concerned that Google and Amazon are going to sell you down the river, don't use it! It's that simple.

    Where's the outrage against Microsoft for allowing all of this seething spyware to install itself so easily? Likewise, where's the bad press about companies that are hawking this garbage and actively selling your information without permission? I can't tell you how many machines I've had to clean out this sludge from. Thank G-d for Mozilla!

    • You know, I'm really getting irritated over the outrage I'm seeing against VOLUNTARY web services. Personally I don't have a problem with using Gmail when it's available, nor do I care of Amazon tracks my searches if it makes for a better and more efficient web experience.

      People are going crazy over this stuff, but they forget the fact that these services are not required. If you're paranoid and concerned that Google and Amazon are going to sell you down the river, don't use it! It's that simple.

      The

      • Re:Sound off.. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by orthogonal ( 588627 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:58AM (#8891697) Journal
        And, on a completely unrelated note, what is the G-d thing?

        He's probably Jewish; Jewish religious law prohibits writing the L-rd's name, so the euphemism "G-d" is used instead. (Ironically, since the Hebrew language has no vowels, so presumably this circumlocution wouldn't work in G-d's "own" language."

        It's very standard and not at all a personal idiosyncrasy of the poster.

        As to the rest of your comment: spot on!

        As a society, the U.S. (less so Europe) has acquiesced in giving up our privacy piecemeal: until lately, we suffered telemarketers to phone us in the sanctity of our homes, and we're now allowing businesses to track us as well, in order to get a "discount" on products already artificially marked up. And we allow banks and credit card companies to collect marketing data based on our purchases, without the pretense of a discount.

        Hey, business isn't collecting this information on a lark, folks.

        It's far from free to hand out millions of "loyalty card" and put together tracking systems and computers and databases data mining.

        ("Loyalty" cards? When I was a kid, you were loyal to your country and your family. Now I'm supposed to be "loyal" to a fucking supermarket? Did I mis-read the story of the minutemen? Did they lay down their lives for Safeway and 5% off assorted frozen dinners?)

        So I think we can safely assume that, given the cost of all this tracking, the companies doing it have assured themselves that they'll make much more money by doing it, than it costs them to do it.

        Now, since these companies are (mostly) in the business of selling products to "end-users" -- that's you, the person being tracked, or selling your data to other companies that want to market to "end users" -- again, that's you with the bar code figuratively tattooed on your ass (or for readers of the Christian Bible's Revelations, the forehead), where, exactly do you think all that money is going to come from?

        Yeah, that;s right: the companies are tracking you because they mean to squeeze more -- much more, given the costs of tracking -- out of you. Either the company tracking you extracts it themselves, or the company that bought the data has to jack up their consumer prices to cover the cost of buying the data.

        So in the end, after you've sold your birthright of freedom and privacy for a mess of pottage that's 20% off for "loyalty card members", after you've been tracked from mall to market to mortgage payment like a tagged animal in a biologist's field research project, after all that in the long term, you're not really going to be saving anything.

        Quick, check the card they assigned you, and see if the name on it isn't "Sucker".
    • You are so right on. Additionally, simply because we know about this stuff does not mean we need to speak up on the behalf of others who are less knowledgeable. Instead, we need to keep up the good work developing alternative (and much better in most cases) solutions to the lousy commercial ones. As Linux continues to catch on at all levels, it presumably will help force out malware due to the heightened difficulty in engineering such software for an OS such as Linux, BSD, or others. Fighting these anno
    • by tentimestwenty ( 693290 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:49AM (#8891668)
      The reason you see so much outrage against voluntary services is that the web is a mass medium. When you have hundreds of thousands of unaware average consumers sign up for a compromising service, it's an approval for the company to require the service for ALL users in the future. It's the same with phone/cable/net bundles. Once you get a critical mass of people on board, companies can force the rest to adopt the same by either cancelling old services, or simply requiring all people to meet the new "standard". Unfortunately, your vote (your dollar) doesn't have meaningful sway in such a liquid environment. The wave of the masses can overrun your choice pretty easily because the only regulator is the market. Voluntary services used to be arbitrated quite well by individual choice, but the speed and ease of signing up, especially by accepting restrictions by default, makes the web an easy place for monopolistic companies to force their standards by stealth.
    • It's just another thing for the people here to bitch about. Nothing more.
    • Re:Sound off.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by orthogonal ( 588627 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:31PM (#8891884) Journal
      You know, I'm really getting irritated over the outrage I'm seeing against VOLUNTARY web services. Personally I don't have a problem with using Gmail when it's available, nor do I care of Amazon tracks my searches if it makes for a better and more efficient web experience.

      Well, of course you're right. No one is being forced to use GMail or A9. And presumably the astute (and paranoid) will read the privacy notices and avoid selling their privacy for a mess of pottage -- I mean, services.

      One problem with the Libertarian Capitalistic outlook -- much as I'm sympathetic to Libertarianism, and see great values in Capitalism -- is that it requires all actors to be rational, and to have roughly the same knowledge of the "playing field". (this is why, for instance, insider trading is banned -- because it undermines the level playing field that must exist for the free market to work.)

      But we have corporations that employee literally hundreds of psychologists and marketing and advertising professionals who make it their lives' work to figure out how to get disarm or misdirect our ability to be rational economic actors. And these corporations also employee lawyers and economists and lobbyists, so that the corporation, as an entity, has much more knowledge than the individual can ever hoe to have.

      A small case in point: their are widespread allegations that many companies, cellular phone companies especially, intentionally overcharge customers. They idea is that many customers won't notice or won't be willing to spend hours on hold with Customer Disservice to correct the bill. And even those customers willing to pay the additional (time) cost to get their bills corrected will be giving the company interest on the mis-billed money. The interest for one little customer is miniscule, but for the company teat small bit of interest over millions of customer accounts means a significant additional revenue.

      So we have people who -- according to the traditional laissez faire capitalist treatment -- are supposed to be rational economic actors, and yet we know damned well that they won't be because the companies planned ahead of time to make sure they couldn't be.

      What's the damage? Well, look at AOL. Nobody was forced to use AOL, and savvy, computer literate people knew better than to pay inflated rates for substandard dial-up with a plethora of additional, in-your-face ads. So AOL got the noobs and the boobs. No skin off our elite asses, right?

      Wrong! AOL's massive and massively uninformed user base hit Usenet like a tidal wave in '96, and Usenet has not to this day regained its former wit, conviviality, or usefulness. Entire 'net communities were wiped out, never to be seen again.

      Or consider Gator and File-Sharing products filled with spyware. Those of us on Slashdot are savvy enough to get a GPL'd version of whatever we want on sourceforge, or to at least run AdAware after installing dome piece of crap that brings along 97 pieces of spyware and adware with it. So again, our elite asses aren't getting skinned, are they?

      Wrong again! That spyware not only clogs the noobs' computers, it allows them to be compromised and turned into vectors of Trojans and engines of spamming. And we "elite" get the spam and get DDOSed and get bombarded with Trojans knocking on our ports as much as any noob.

      It's sort of like keeping the environment clean: it's my vested interest to keep this environment clean, because I have to live in this environment. If the whole net, or a significant portion, is buying into something dubious, I know that sooner or later I'll feel the consequences too.

      Maybe Gmail is not a threat to privacy; but if it is, I want to know that before I'm one of a handful of cranky holdouts, and all the email I get comes from, and all the email I send goes to, GMail. Because at that point, I am part of the system, whether I like it or not.
  • by nvrrobx ( 71970 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:10AM (#8891473) Homepage
    The Google Toolbar does this also. I don't know about A9's, but Google's asks you when you install it if you want the advanced features, which require it to communicate back to Google.
  • A little extra info (Score:3, Informative)

    by LabRat007 ( 765435 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:10AM (#8891474) Homepage
    There was a discussion on this topic a day or two ago. Take a look at this /. forum [slashdot.org] when you get a chance. Good stuff really. Many ramblings about the possible fallout of this type of info accumulation.
  • forget it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mr_tommy ( 619972 ) * <tgraham@g m a i l . c om> on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:11AM (#8891478) Journal
    People really need to get over these privacy concerns and actually look at real issues (DMCA, MPAA / RIAA). The media latches onto these issues because google and amazon are big names; the reality of logging is that every server does it!
    Slashdot is logging us right now - via apache. We're logged / monitored throughout life, and there is ultimatly little we can do about it. Better to move onto more important issues.
    • Re:forget it (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Stuwee ( 739059 )
      I couldn't agree more with the parent. Servers log our browsing, and there's nothing more to it. How this information is used isn't up to us; and once again there's nothing more to it. A9, Google, or <<insert your favourite search engine name here>> could technically display a complete history of your searches. There's no cause for complaint here; we're basically disputing the lack of anonymity of the HTTP over TCP/IP.

      This is synonymous somewhat to how a highstreet store could show you a list
    • Re:forget it (Score:3, Insightful)

      by _Sprocket_ ( 42527 )

      ...the reality of logging is that every server does it!
      Slashdot is logging us right now - via apache. We're logged / monitored throughout life, and there is ultimatly little we can do about it.

      It is all a matter of scope. Google tracking your searches or Slashdot tracking your article interest is one thing. Amazon (or Doubleclick) tracking all your browsing is entirely different.

      The US military has a concept called "Essential Elements of Friendly Information" (EEFIs). EEFIs are pieces of informat

  • Want privacy? (Score:5, Informative)

    by GoofyBoy ( 44399 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:12AM (#8891486) Journal
    Don't use it.

    Want to use it?

    The full quote:
    "The history server stores -- on our servers -- your history of interaction with us for the purpose of bringing that back to you in a very convenient way. Whenever you come to the site, we can show you what you searched for in the past in a very easy-to-organize fashion. If you want to hide some of that, you can opt out at any time. If you install the toolbar, then all your Web browsing, as well as all your searching, is stored as well. And we are working on many different ways to improve that."

    You can opt-out.

    Still demand your Constiutional Right to this private service?

    From: http://www.a9.com/-/company/privacypolicy.jsp
    "Wh at Choices and Access Do I Have?
    If you would prefer not to be recognized on our site, we recommend that you use our alternate service located at generic.A9.com. On generic.A9.com, we will not recognize your A9.com or Amazon.com cookie. Information we gather on generic.A9.com will not be used in our data analysis (other than to detect abuse) and will not be used to personalize the services we offer you."

    Still not enough for you?

    May I suggest: http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
  • ...to disrespect the user's privacy like that, it's really not an issue if you're using any decent browser. If you bring this up with your Windows-using friends, it might get them to at least start using Firefox.
  • by PetoskeyGuy ( 648788 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:13AM (#8891493)
    See http://toolbar.google.com/privacy.html

    You can turn it of by disabling the advanced features. It's part of what makes pagerank work.
  • Media Hype? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nial-in-a-box ( 588883 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:17AM (#8891514) Homepage
    Why would there be media hype? This is the media and what they do. A simple glance at the Dilbert 2003 Weasel Awards [dilbert.com] reveals that the news media is the third weaseliest profession. Though this is by no means a scientific survey and really cannot fully support my claim, I do believe that there is some validity to those results. The media is all about sensationalizing whatever they can get their hands on, but that doesn't mean that everything this community finds important will be publicized in any fashion at all by any other news service.

    This "invasion of privacy" is not really an involuntary invasion. You have to know the risks of installing such software on your machine. If you voluntarily let someone into your home, are they invading your privacy by keeping track (in any fashion) of what you happen to be doing? I say no, because by allowing them in and not having unbreakable rules then you are allowing them to at very least keep track of what they see. This all goes back to advertising and squeezing every last penny out of it. The media makes pretty much all of their money with advertising, so of course they will not investigate their own questionable procedures lest they incriminate themselves in their own publications. Just because the spyware is coming from Amazon doesn't mean that it's newsworthy. I hate it just as much as everyone else here does, but you have to understand that if they think they can make money off of it, they'll do it. Companies like Amazon couldn't care less about having every customer being happy. As long as the money keeps pouring in they'll think they're doing everything right.

  • " Where is all the media hype about this privacy issue?"

    I dunno, I can't seem to find any privacy concerns between my Konqueror and A9........
  • by carb ( 611951 )
    Simple: Amazon isn't exactly a competitor of Microsoft's like Google is. Clearly M$ had bought out the world's media outlooks to give Google an unfair shake. Hey, we all know this could be true ;)
  • oh, come on (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Knights who say 'INT ( 708612 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:32AM (#8891587) Journal
    It's not like if it was cleverly cloaked. They're pretty open about it - you're trading in some privacy for some convenience. I mean, not everyone browses porn of embarassing kinds they wouldn't like other people to see.

    If it's useful enough, I could see myself thinking of installing it at the Win32 box I use at work. I mostly just look at slashdot and my webmail (hosted at my home Linux computer) anyway.

    I mean, gee, there's always a trade-off between convenience and privacy. Not everyone's encrypting all their outbound email with a note on how to install PGP.
    • Not everyone's encrypting all their outbound email with a note on how to install PGP.

      There are many reasons for that, and it's not simply a voluntary tradeoff of privacy for convenience.

      First of all, you CAN'T do that. Do you understand asymmetric key encryption? That means that in order to encrypt email you're sending TO someone, she must first make her public key available to you. i.e. she needs to have installed some software which generates a keypair and exports the public half in a format you can us
  • I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by symbolic ( 11752 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:33AM (#8891590)
    The later incarnations of Mozilla (Firefox) have done some nice things with their search function, both for the history and browsing in general. Why would anyone want to entertain the notion of using beacon software like the Amazon toolbar? Of course, I don't buy anything from Amazon, so maybe that's another reason this isn't a big issue for me. So far, my favorite online book vendor is nerdbooks.com- nice people, great service, and NO SPYING.
  • by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:35AM (#8891600)
    A search engine that knows my browsing history could be very useful for:
    1. Finding that page I saw last month. If the engine knew my history, I could limit the search to just pages in my history.
    2. Finding new pages that I have never seen. This would exclude all previously seen pages from the search results. A better version would even exclude hits that had appeared in previous search hit lists. I often do multiple searches in which the Nth search finds items that I saw (and rejected) in one of previous N-1 searches.
    3. Tracking lost pages. The engine could periodically check my bookmarks and relocate pages that had been moved (or find pages similar to the missing page). If the page is truely gone, I could use Google cache to snag an archival copy.
    4. Automatically finding pages similar to ones that I like. If the search engine notices that I visit certain pages repeatedly (e.g., /.), it might run a search for pages that are similar to my favorite sites.
    5. Social networking: Finding people that have browsing histories like me.

    Yes, there are some nasty privacy issues, so one needs to pick the partner carefully (as if your ISP doesn't know your browsing history). What is interesting is that services like A9 and GMail create a new level of personalization in which the massive technological scope of an Amazon or Google is put to work for individuals.
  • by PetoskeyGuy ( 648788 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:45AM (#8891647)
    I was so upset about reading that Amazon was tracking my searches that I checked all my other programs for similar privacy violations. What I found may shock and appall some of you.

    It must have been that last service pack I downloaded or that damn Auto Update, but you'll never believe it. INTERNET EXPLORER TRACKS YOUR BROWSING! Not only does it track every link you click on it also saves every image or web page you view. I found a hidden cache of html, images, flash files, audio files... everything I've looked at for weeks was there!

    There was even a whole folder full of thousands of cookies! Websites sometimes use them I'm told, but that damn microsoft has been stealing them from websites I browse and backing them up in a secret folder on my hard drive. I deleted them and now all my web site preferences are gone and some of the sites I use don't log me in automatically anymore. Microsoft must have detected that I deleted them and they are demonstrating their power over me.

    Well that's it I've had it I'm not going to take it any more! I'm switching to Mozilla today. Take that Microsoft.

    P.S. Wal-Mart is switching everything to RFID tags, but that's where I get my tinfoil from. Does anyone have a good source of 1990s era tin foil? I've been using my baked potato tin foil to kill the RFID tags, but it doesn't always stick right and the wife refuses to wear her tinfoil hat at all now. I'm not sure if she can be trusted any longer...
    • INTERNET EXPLORER TRACKS YOUR BROWSING!
      Amazingly enough, someone I know tried to convince me of just that. His "proof" was that when he launched IE, his CD drive spun up. Since IE had no business reading his CD drive when he was looking at websites, he concluded that MS was spying on everything he did. He had a similar argument for MSN Messenger and the .NET runtime. Laugh all you want, but some people think that way.
  • Disturbing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by haxeh ( 766837 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @11:51AM (#8891673)
    I find it to be extremely disturbing that people (especially slashdotters, apparently) are willing to give tracking information with such little reservation. It's gotten to the point where people say "well, i'd like amazon to know what i search, so they can give me better content."

    Perhaps I'm just one in the paranoid crowd, but it seems to me that it's a bad idea to have everything "personalized". I don't want to have advertisements directed at my predicted statistical response to them. I find it particularly intrusive to try and predict what I'm most likely to buy, then flood me with advertisements crafted for my demographic. I'd like to keep the companies *outside* of my head.

    And of course, everyone says "well, it's just a service, you don't have to use it", but if these kind of things are seen as acceptable, at some point it will become so universal that even if you don't want to be tracked and 'targetted', you won't have a choice. What happens if in a few years, to make any purchase online, I have to agree to having every site I vist tracked? Is it *really* that unrealistic? Would most people really object? I think the answer is beginning to change.
  • It works both ways (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Graftweed ( 742763 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:01PM (#8891709)
    As the old adage goes, everyone can find out what you're doing online, they just don't have any meaningful (or easy) way of linking that information to your identity.

    What's happening here is that now Amazon can do just that. They already have all the details they'll ever need about you, such as name, address and credit card number(s), they just added a way to correlate all your book searches to that identity, and now apparently all your browsing history too. Is this really that valuable to the common person? Do WE need to know every book we've ever browsed or every page we've ever visited? Marketing types will no doubt love this, but seriously, how will all this information ever work for you more than to whoever is hosting it?
  • Why bother using A9 -- a brand new, vendor-specific solution implementing privacy policies that are in the vendor's interests, and not the end user's? Google has proven that it's more willing to preserve end users' privacy, and to clearly state in what manner their information will be served.

    Personally, I'd trust Google over Amazon any day. Google was founded by two geeks, serves a huge community of geeks, runs geek technology (Linux) as their core infrastructure, and stands to profit not by selling a se
  • OH NOES!!oneone1! (Score:2, Interesting)

    OH NO! A9 IS GOING TO TRACK OUR SEARCHES AND BROWSING IN ORDER TO SHOW US STUFF WE MAY LIKE! Come on people. It's not like A9 is going to record passwords that we type, and it's not like they're going to print our credit card numbers. It's not like they know us "in person" and are going to come over and kidnap our children. It's not like a "cookie" (refrence: cookie, [reference.com] first shown definition, item #3), aka A PIECE OF TEXT is going to allow someone to bankrupt our banking accounts. "Privacy concerns" are fa
  • by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:28PM (#8891868) Homepage
    It's not privacy people are yelling about; it's the PERCEPTION of privacy. Lots of folks have known all along that these little spies have been getting installed on people's computers. Some of them have actually done something about it; they install and run software like Spybot Search and Destroy [kolla.de]. A few will even switch to an alternate browser like Mozilla [mozilla.org] to help keep spyware off their machines. But largely they don't care unless it jumps up and bites them on the backside. GMail was planning to do just that, by targeting ads based on message content. Never mind the information would never be audited by a human, it's just the reminder that it's not private that's rankling.

    "Symbolism over substance", as Rush Limbaugh pointed out; to most people, it doesn't matter if they have privacy so long as they can pretend they have it. Just like they can vote for people who lie their asses off (and I'm not even going to draw a distinction between either Republicrat party), just so long as they can PRETEND they're electing people who have their best interests at heart.
  • Opera... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cyno01 ( 573917 ) <Cyno01@hotmail.com> on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:34PM (#8891904) Homepage
    Opera Has a search bar built in that you just drag down to select where your searching. It defaults to google, but theres AllTheWeb, super search, Amazon, news Search, TechTracker Search, and half a dozen others, wish there was IMDB search too, but anywho... This seems to be the functionality of both the Google and Amazon toolbars without tracking
  • by Mustang Matt ( 133426 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:34PM (#8891907)
    When you install the Google toolbar in IE. It asks you if you want to turn on the PageRank feature which sends information back to google.

    I suppose the difference is that google is probably not keeping track of an individual users browsing habits vs just browsing habits, whereas amazon will keep track of your individual habits so they can try to display proper ads to you.

    This is absolutely no different than if you're browsing amazon.com's site logged in except that you're searching the web instead of just amazon.

    Right?
  • by Everyman ( 197621 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:38PM (#8891932) Homepage
    There's Google Watch [google-watch.org].

    There's Yahoo Watch [yahoo-watch.org].

    And there's also Amazon Watch [amazon-watch.org].

    Amazon's privacy policy is very explicit, and they do have the generic version available that doesn't track you. Anyone who fails to use the generic version is asking for a comprehensive, personally-identifiable profile at Amazon/Alexa/a9.com that they cannot review and cannot delete. Amazon is very up front about this.

    All such profiling, whether done by Google, Yahoo, or Amazon, is presently justified by the Holy Grail of "personalized search." But who needs personalized search when the cost is so high to your personal privacy? This is what the focus should be on -- criticizing all those pundits who help the profilers by trumpeting the possibilities of personalized search.

    After all, 99 times out of 100 you can "personalize" any search on any search engine by merely adding one additional word in the search box to limit the results that are returned. Personalized search is for lazy people, but even these people don't deserve to be cyber-fingerprinted everywhere they go online.

    You don't let a two-year-old play with matches, and you shouldn't let programmers at search engines play with "personalized search."
  • by hatrisc ( 555862 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @12:42PM (#8891965) Homepage
    Amazon does this all the time, they advertise other products that they think you might be interested in. Therefore, I see no controversy in google automagically displaying ads to you based on the contents of your email. They aren't invading your privacy at all. Amazon, now this is a new and different problem. You have a tool, that you think will help you search the web better, and instead that's it's secondary feature. Amazon is making money on collecting your private information, and openly saving it for future use. Seems extremely shady to me.
  • Duh.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by coene ( 554338 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @01:13PM (#8892154)
    Amazon [amazon.com] owns Alexa [alexa.com], which has a Toolbar [alexa.com] that sends your browsing habits to Amazon [amazon.com] for rankings and analysis [alexa.com].

    a9 [a9.com] likely uses Alexa [alexa.com] data to generate better search results, and the a9 toolbar [a9.com] likely sends data to Alexa [alexa.com] and/or a9 [a9.com] for analysis.

    Yep, I think that's right.
  • by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @06:42PM (#8894158)
    Because Amazon tells potential customers upfront what they're doing with the data generated in a search, it isn't a privacy issue.

    If you agree to an interview with the local TV news anchor, are you going to whine about privacy when they run the clip at 11 o'clock?

    If you don't won't Amazon to store data about you, don't use it.
  • Confusion? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DuranDuran ( 252246 ) on Saturday April 17, 2004 @09:03PM (#8894772)
    I'll probably burn some karma for this, but I can't help but feel that there are some out there who wave the privacy flag simply in order to justify, mask or excuse their own anti-social behaviour.

    No, this isn't a troll - I just think that not every story that involves someone watching what someone else is doing shoudl have life-ending privacy concerns. In this case, you have to invite the company to watch you in the first place! If I invite, say, a plumber or electrician into my house, I'm going to have to accept the fact that they may see (shock! horror!) me going about my normal everyday business.

    If some of these privacy advocates had their way, none of us would talk to or interact with anyone else *ever*.

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Working...