<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do Not Track Registry Likely to Include Exemptions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/</link>
	<description>Keeping politicians&#039; hands off the Net &#38; everything else related to technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:01:15 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: gr</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/comment-page-1/#comment-52076</link>
		<dc:creator>gr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/#comment-52076</guid>
		<description>&quot;I think that asking the government to hold a master list of IPs and consumer names is a bad idea, or at least one that won’t do much to really protect consumers.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The Do-Not-Track list is unfortunately named, as people are led to believe what you just did: that it tracks consumers. It works more like an offender database: it tracks the advertisers, and then the consumer can just download the list and make the choice to protect themselves. So it is quite what you want to be: an easy way for industry to allow consumers to opt-out.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I blogged about this  when the list was first introduced:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-track-lists-and-registries/&quot;&gt;http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;On your cookie idea, if we create a special kind of cookie that anti-spyware doesn&#039;t delete, then malware and trackers will start using it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think that asking the government to hold a master list of IPs and consumer names is a bad idea, or at least one that won’t do much to really protect consumers.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Do-Not-Track list is unfortunately named, as people are led to believe what you just did: that it tracks consumers. It works more like an offender database: it tracks the advertisers, and then the consumer can just download the list and make the choice to protect themselves. So it is quite what you want to be: an easy way for industry to allow consumers to opt-out.</p>
<p>I blogged about this  when the list was first introduced:</p>
<p><a href="http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-track-lists-and-registries/"></a><a href="http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-.." rel="nofollow">http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-..</a>.</p>
<p>On your cookie idea, if we create a special kind of cookie that anti-spyware doesn&#8217;t delete, then malware and trackers will start using it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gr</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/comment-page-1/#comment-41386</link>
		<dc:creator>gr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/#comment-41386</guid>
		<description>&quot;I think that asking the government to hold a master list of IPs and consumer names is a bad idea, or at least one that won’t do much to really protect consumers.&quot;

The Do-Not-Track list is unfortunately named, as people are led to believe what you just did: that it tracks consumers. It works more like an offender database: it tracks the advertisers, and then the consumer can just download the list and make the choice to protect themselves. So it is quite what you want to be: an easy way for industry to allow consumers to opt-out.

I blogged about this  when the list was first introduced:


http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-track-lists-and-registries/

On your cookie idea, if we create a special kind of cookie that anti-spyware doesn&#039;t delete, then malware and trackers will start using it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think that asking the government to hold a master list of IPs and consumer names is a bad idea, or at least one that won’t do much to really protect consumers.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Do-Not-Track list is unfortunately named, as people are led to believe what you just did: that it tracks consumers. It works more like an offender database: it tracks the advertisers, and then the consumer can just download the list and make the choice to protect themselves. So it is quite what you want to be: an easy way for industry to allow consumers to opt-out.</p>
<p>I blogged about this  when the list was first introduced:</p>
<p><a href="http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-track-lists-and-registries/" rel="nofollow">http://infoadvocate.org/blog/2007/11/04/do-not-track-lists-and-registries/</a></p>
<p>On your cookie idea, if we create a special kind of cookie that anti-spyware doesn&#8217;t delete, then malware and trackers will start using it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cordblomquist</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/comment-page-1/#comment-52075</link>
		<dc:creator>cordblomquist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 17:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/#comment-52075</guid>
		<description>Jeff, sorry if my first paragraph made it sound like you endorsed the plan, which I now you don&#039;t.  I wanted to state that I empathize with your concerns and that I don&#039;t think the list is a good way to address those concerns.  So we agree on that front.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What specifically do you and CDD want to see done on the federal level?  The do-not-track list seems flawed, but is there a better solution that can be implemented via federal law?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, sorry if my first paragraph made it sound like you endorsed the plan, which I now you don&#8217;t.  I wanted to state that I empathize with your concerns and that I don&#8217;t think the list is a good way to address those concerns.  So we agree on that front.</p>
<p>What specifically do you and CDD want to see done on the federal level?  The do-not-track list seems flawed, but is there a better solution that can be implemented via federal law?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cord Blomquist</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/comment-page-1/#comment-41320</link>
		<dc:creator>Cord Blomquist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/#comment-41320</guid>
		<description>Jeff, sorry if my first paragraph made it sound like you endorsed the plan, which I now you don&#039;t.  I wanted to state that I empathize with your concerns and that I don&#039;t think the list is a good way to address those concerns.  So we agree on that front.

What specifically do you and CDD want to see done on the federal level?  The do-not-track list seems flawed, but is there a better solution that can be implemented via federal law?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, sorry if my first paragraph made it sound like you endorsed the plan, which I now you don&#8217;t.  I wanted to state that I empathize with your concerns and that I don&#8217;t think the list is a good way to address those concerns.  So we agree on that front.</p>
<p>What specifically do you and CDD want to see done on the federal level?  The do-not-track list seems flawed, but is there a better solution that can be implemented via federal law?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Chester</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/comment-page-1/#comment-52074</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Chester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/#comment-52074</guid>
		<description>The Center for Digital Democracy does not support a do-not-track list.  We want federal rules that give individuals control over their data--so it can&#039;t be readily used by advertisers or government.  The commercial surveillance system put in place tracks and analyzes our activities online. It&#039;s not a debate about people selling &quot;duvet covers&quot; via digital marketing.  It&#039;s preventing, if an individual desires, from having a system used by others that includes sensitive information about our lives (health concerns, political interests, etc).  At a time when a growing majority, especially young people, are living their lives online, do we want either Big Brother/Big Sister from Washington or Madison Ave. always peering over our (digital) shoulder?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Center for Digital Democracy does not support a do-not-track list.  We want federal rules that give individuals control over their data&#8211;so it can&#8217;t be readily used by advertisers or government.  The commercial surveillance system put in place tracks and analyzes our activities online. It&#8217;s not a debate about people selling &#8220;duvet covers&#8221; via digital marketing.  It&#8217;s preventing, if an individual desires, from having a system used by others that includes sensitive information about our lives (health concerns, political interests, etc).  At a time when a growing majority, especially young people, are living their lives online, do we want either Big Brother/Big Sister from Washington or Madison Ave. always peering over our (digital) shoulder?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Chester</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/comment-page-1/#comment-41318</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Chester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 09:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2008/04/25/do-not-track-registry-likely-to-include-exemptions/#comment-41318</guid>
		<description>The Center for Digital Democracy does not support a do-not-track list.  We want federal rules that give individuals control over their data--so it can&#039;t be readily used by advertisers or government.  The commercial surveillance system put in place tracks and analyzes our activities online. It&#039;s not a debate about people selling &quot;duvet covers&quot; via digital marketing.  It&#039;s preventing, if an individual desires, from having a system used by others that includes sensitive information about our lives (health concerns, political interests, etc).  At a time when a growing majority, especially young people, are living their lives online, do we want either Big Brother/Big Sister from Washington or Madison Ave. always peering over our (digital) shoulder?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Center for Digital Democracy does not support a do-not-track list.  We want federal rules that give individuals control over their data&#8211;so it can&#8217;t be readily used by advertisers or government.  The commercial surveillance system put in place tracks and analyzes our activities online. It&#8217;s not a debate about people selling &#8220;duvet covers&#8221; via digital marketing.  It&#8217;s preventing, if an individual desires, from having a system used by others that includes sensitive information about our lives (health concerns, political interests, etc).  At a time when a growing majority, especially young people, are living their lives online, do we want either Big Brother/Big Sister from Washington or Madison Ave. always peering over our (digital) shoulder?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
