Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

With mounting concerns over online privacy and information gathering by search engines, Google has come up with a solution, Opt-out village, a 22-acre remote mountain enclave for those obsessed with privacy. According to trusted news network, ONN, access to the new privacy feature is simple. Just click the opt-out button on the Google home page. Within minutes, a van will arrive to sweep you away to Opt-Out Village nestled in the Pacific NorthWest. A team of privacy experts will eliminate your personal identifiers and guarantee that your name and address will not appear on Google local searches.

On a side table in his Washington offices, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz keeps a framed image of Arnold Schwarzenegger from the 1984 film The Terminator. It was given to Leibowitz a couple of years ago by one of the FTC's regional offices, an homage to his crackdown on spyware that surreptitiously gathers information on Web users' surfing habits. Now, Leibowitz wants to terminate-or at least rein in-a different practice he finds no less harmful to consumers: delivering ads to individuals based on the Web pages they visit and searches they carry out. Appointed by President Barack Obama in February to run the country's top consumer watchdog, Leibowitz has made so-called behavioral targeting a top priority. How far he goes in regulating the practice could have big implications for a host of companies that depend on Web advertising and engage in some form of targeting. These include Google (GOOG), Facebook, and Microsoft (MSFT), which on July 29 announced a plan to partner with Yahoo! (YHOO) in the area of Internet search. It would also affect the way legions of companies and advertisers craft marketing campaigns. Behavioral targeting has become more prevalent as it gets easier and cheaper to use software to track online behavior and then use the data to pitch Web users related goods and services. These ads are more likely to induce a customer to make a purchase or otherwise respond to a pitch, researchers say.

If you've been advertising online for a long time, you may have gone through stages: sticking with banner ads at first, and then going with search engine advertising, and maybe putting your ads on a publisher network belonging to a search engine or an advertising company. Most of the time you probably tried to put your ad in a matching context. That might be the wrong approach. I've written before about behavioral advertising, also known as behavioral targeting. You can read my first article about it here. If the topic of behavioral targeting intrigues you, you might also want to read about behavioral retargeting. Before I plunge into the content and focus of this article, though, let me give you a quick definition. Behavioral advertising is a form of online advertising that follows the user around. For example, a web surfer who has just priced some flights on an airline's website might be shown a travel-related ad when he surfs to the next website in which he's interested, which might be for the local pizza joint. The theory behind behavioral advertising is, in a sense, pretty simple. Most people are bombarded with ads most of the time, especially when web surfing. As a result, we tune them out. Because of the usual advertising practices, we might be better at tuning out ads that are in the same context as the content we're reading. In other words, someone reading content on a web site about where the best ski slopes are just might have completely ignored an ad for your lovely Aspen getaway. To rise above this clamor, it's necessary to hit web surfers with a surprise, something that doesn't fit the normal context. Think about it: aren't you more likely to stare at someone talking into a banana than a cell phone? That's the theory, but it's new enough that researchers and marketers are still doing surveys to prove or disprove it. The most recent one was conducted by BL Labs and released by ad network BlueLithium. You'd probably expect it to

making best indexing in goggle and bing. RADJASEOTEA is a master of backlinks. You want indexing in goggle and bing. LOOK THIS www.fiverr.com/radjaseotea/making-best-super-backlink-143445

"The Electronic Frontier Foundation said it sued the Justice Department and other U.S. agencies to get information about their policies for using social networks including Facebook and Twitter in investigations, data collection and surveillance. The civil rights group said in a complaint filed yesterday in federal court in San Francisco that the government has used social-networking sites in conducting investigations and hasn't clarified the scope of that use or whether there are any restrictions or oversight to prevent abuses. The EFF said in its complaint that it is seeking the information to "help inform Congress and the public about the effect of such uses and purposes on citizens' privacy rights and associated legal protections." It cited news articles that reported police searching Facebook photos for evidence of underage drinking and an FBI search of an individual's home after the person sent messages on Twitter during the G-20 Summit notifying protesters of police movements. Facebook, based in Palo Alto, California, is the world's largest social networking site with more than 300 million users who post photos, messages and other information on their own free Facebook pages. Twitter, based in San Francisco, is a free Web service with 58 million users that lets people send 140- character messages, called "tweets," to multiple followers. EFF, also based in San Francisco, filed Freedom of Information Act requests with federal agencies in October. None of the agencies had completed processing the requests by the applicable 20-day deadline, according to the complaint. The lawsuit seeks a court order for the government to process the requests and produce documents."

It is hard work looking for a job, Matt Sawyer said. "Well with the economy being down right now, it's pretty hard," said Sawyer. Like most job hunters, Matt is posting his resume on various online job sites. But you have to be careful when sending out your personal information over the Internet, privacy expert Pam Dixon said. "The problem is, if you don't use it correctly, it can come back to haunt you," she said. Dixon runs the World Privacy Forum and warns job hunters to be cautious with their personal information when posting their resume. "In fact any competent job site will give you the option of hiding your personal information," said Dixon. Scam artists have been known to steal personal information from resumes and use it to apply for credit. That is why Dixon said you should only include your first initial and last name, no full names, when writing your resume. She also said not to include your phone number or address. Dixon said you should create an email address that is temporary and just use it for your job search. Dixon said scam artist will even call people from their resume and ask for detailed information like a copy of their driver's license or social security number or even their credit card information. The scammers will claim it's for a background check but it's only to steal from the job seeker. Matt admits if he was approached for a job he might give away too much information. "I think when people first get that call and they're real excited about it, they might just jump into it and go ahead and do it," he said.

There are plenty of rumors out in the cyberworld about the future of Twitter, a popular social networking site, and whether the company will be acquired or partner with another company. Some believe one of the suitors is Google Inc. Rumor has it, the two companies are considering collaborating on a Google real time search engine. To make it work, Google could pay cash, stock or a combination of both. Google wouldn't comment on these rumors. Nevertheless, it's an intriguing idea for a company created three years ago that has, to date, not made any money. Analysts think this would be a good marriage, according to MarketWatch. Gartner Inc. analyst Jeff Mann, for one, told the website it's a pretty good idea. "The culture and ambitions of Twitter and Google match." Not only that, there are lots of indications of growth. Twitter's content is now growing by 6 million tweets per day, and that's a win-win situation for Google, for sure.

Google has released a more detailed privacy policy for its Google Books product, a move demanded in recent weeks by several critics of its settlement with publishers and authors. The company announced the new policy in a blog post late Thursday afternoon, saying it developed the policy following conversations with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. Google had previously said it was unable to release a detailed policy because the Google Books product was incomplete due to the fact that the settlement allowing its Book Search project to display certain types of books has yet to be formally approved. However, criticism of Google's lack of detailed information on the subject appears to have forced its hand. "To provide all users with a clear understanding of our practices, and in response to helpful comments about needing to be clearer about the Books product from the FTC and others, we wanted to highlight key provisions of the main Google Privacy Policy in the context of the Google Books service, as well as to describe privacy practices specific to the Google Books service," wrote Jane Horvath, general privacy counsel for Google, in a blog post.

"Scott Fortnum had put in almost a full day of work at his Markham, Ont., office when he decided to "check in" on Foursquare, a location-based social network where users log the names and co-ordinates of the places they visit with a time stamp. The 44-year-old's check-in was marked with a small coral balloon on an embedded Google Map and instantly viewable by the 12 friends he lists on Foursquare - and millions of others. His check-in found its way onto pleaserobme.com, a recently launched website with a mischievous mandate: "listing all those empty homes out there." With March break approaching, many impending vacationers are installing automatic timers on their lights and putting their newspaper subscriptions on hold to deter burglars. Many are also posting on Twitter about when they're leaving and touting their week-long getaway to Jamaica on Facebook - unwittingly letting the online world know exactly when they're away. Mr. Fortnum's check-in appeared this way on Please Rob Me: @sfortnum left home and checked in 30 minutes ago: I'm at ALS Canada (3000 Steeles Ave. E. #200, DVP & Steeles, Toronto.) http://4sq.com/4MmX51 Many Foursquare users such as Mr. Fortnum cross-post their check-ins to Twitter, where they are easy to find through the search function. With some simple coding, Please Rob Me's creators are able to collect those millions of public tweets on their site in real time, highlighting one of the many security concerns that springs from broadcasting one's whereabouts online. Frank Groeneveld, one of the three students from the Netherlands who designed Please Rob Me, says he co-created the site to give members of social networks a wake-up call."

Finally a site that might make someone a profit!

"In a case that could prove to be one of the most important privacy rights battles of the modern era, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear argument this week on the proper legal standard to apply when prosecutors demand cell phone location data. The data, which are recorded about once every seven seconds whenever a cell phone is turned on, effectively track the whereabouts and the comings and goings of every cell phone user. Justice Department lawyers argue that, by statute, they need only show "reasonable grounds" to believe that such records are "relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation." But a federal magistrate judge in Pittsburgh strongly disagreed in February 2008, issuing a 52-page opinion that said the prosecutors must meet the "probable cause" standard. "This court believes that citizens continue to hold a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information the government seeks regarding their physical movements/locations -- even now that such information is routinely produced by their cell phones -- and that, therefore, the government's investigatory search of such information continues to be protected by the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement," U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan wrote."

Turn the cell phone off and put on your tin foil hat so the government and aliens can't track you!

"A federal prosecutor tracked down a Seattle fraud suspect in Mexico this year through his Facebook posts. A man's Twitter messages to fellow demonstrators at a recent protest in Pittsburgh led to an FBI search of his home and short-lived charges of interfering with police. The CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies reportedly are investing in a software firm that monitors half a million social networking Web sites each day. There's nothing wrong with law enforcement agencies' using Internet technology to investigate crimes, Bay Area privacy advocates say. But they want the federal government to say how, when and why its agents look at Americans' social networking accounts."

"We all know that Internet and communications technology is changing rapidly, creating huge opportunities for business innovation and individual self-expression. Most people are probably not aware, however, that privacy law is not evolving nearly as quickly. It is time to update legal protections to reflect the impact the digital revolution is having on modern life. Cloud computing -- a bit of tech-jargon meaning the use of remote servers to store and process data -- is a great example. The movement of personal and proprietary data off desktop computers and into "the cloud", which is made up of server farms and broadband connections, is a major disruptive trend in computing. Unless our laws change to account for cloud computing and other equally momentous technology developments, the Constitution's protection against unreasonable search and seizure will become a relic of the past. The federal law setting standards for government access to personal communications -- the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) -- was written more than two decades ago, before the Internet took off. "

"Data broker ChoicePoint, the victim of a 2004 data breach affecting more than 160,000 U.S. residents, has agreed to strengthen its data security efforts and pay a fine for a second breach in 2008, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission said Monday. ChoicePoint, now a subsidiary of Reed Elsevier, will pay US$275,000 to resolve the newest FTC complaint. The FTC accused the company of failing to implement a comprehensive information security program to protect consumers' personal information, as required by the agency after the 2004 breach. The April 2008 breach compromised the personal data of 13,750 people, the FTC said in a press release. ChoicePoint turned off a "key" electronic security tool used to monitor access to one of its databases, and failed to detect that the security tool was turned off for four months, the FTC said. For a 30-day period, an unknown hacker conducted thousands of unauthorized searches of a ChoicePoint database containing sensitive consumer information, including Social Security numbers, the FTC said. After discovering the breach, the company notified the FTC. If the software tool had been working, ChoicePoint likely would have detected the intrusions "much earlier," the FTC said. "

Companies that track consumer behavior on the Web for targeted advertising without proper consent are near their "last chance" to self-regulate, the head of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission said on Monday. Privacy advocates say regulations on big phone and Internet companies, such as AT&T Inc and Google Inc, are too lax, giving the firms excessive control over consumers' personal information. "From my perspective, the industry is pretty close to its last clear chance to demonstrate" that it can police itself, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz told the Reuters Global Financial Regulation Summit in Washington. Earlier this year, the FTC issued new guidance urging websites to tell consumers that data is being collected during their searches and to allow them to opt out. If companies fail to do a better job of making their privacy policies understandable to the average person, momentum will keep building for greater regulation, Leibowitz said. "It's really up to industry."

U.S. lawmakers plan to introduce privacy legislation that would limit how Internet service providers can track their users, despite reports that no U.S. ISPs are using such technologies except for legitimate security reasons. Representative Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat, and three privacy experts urged lawmakers Thursday at a hearing before the House Energy Commerce subcommittee to pass comprehensive online privacy legislation in the coming months. Advocates of new legislation focused mainly on so-called deep packet inspection (DPI), a form of filtering that network operators can use to examine the content of packets as they travel across the Internet. While DPI can be used to filter spam and identify criminals, the technology raises serious privacy concerns, Boucher said. "Its privacy-intrusion potential is nothing short of frightening," he added. "The thought that a network operator could track a user's every move on the Internet, record the details of every search and read every e-mail ... is alarming."

There was no way I was ever going to convince my parents that Jimi Hendrix's music was good. More than anything, the youth culture was defined by its music. The chasm it created was called "the generation gap" a metaphor for the ideological differences that separated us. There is a new generation gap. It's not defined through music or politics or fashion, those ideas are shared much more among the generations than before. This time it's about privacy. My generation came of age thinking about "1984", the looming threat of "Big Brother" watching over all of us all of the time. It was the government or some group which would monitor all of our actions, know all our habits: who we associate with, what we watch, what buy. 1984 came and went. Nothing like "Big Brother" happened unless you count Apple computer's historic "Big Brother" commercial which ends with the slogan: "On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won't be like "1984". They were right - 2009 is. Personal details used to be considered private. We were careful about who knew what about us and certainly didn't post pictures of our friends, families and fantasies for all to see. Privacy does not seem to be valued anymore. Giving up one's privacy has become a rite of passage. It's what you leave at the portal when you sign up for any of the social networking sites on the internet. The sites are free - as long as you don't calculate the value of your identity, demographics, viewing and buying habits to advertisers. This isn't new, the Nielsen Ratings service has been assembling viewer information since the 1950s for television advertisers, but its methods were primitive in comparison to the two way constant information gathering that's done on the internet. In March 2009, Google initiated the use of "behavioral targeting", which uses information collected on someone's web-browsing behavior, such as the pages they have visited or the searches they have made, to selec

Wikipedia told the controversial U.K. advertising firm Phorm on Thursday not to spy on Wikipedia's users, saying the company's plan to monitor what sites people visit on the net invaded people's privacy. Wikipedia now joins Amazon.co.uk in opting out of the Big-Brother-esque marketing scheme and creating the possibility of a mass opt-out by the net's largest websites. Phorm wants to pay ISPs -- such as British Telecom -- to let it build marketing profiles of its subscribers by installing boxes inside the ISP that monitor every url users visit and every search they run. Using those profiles, Phorm can charge advertisers high rates to serve targeted ads. But in an email sent Thursday, Wikimedia.org told Phorm not to record anything about urls from domains it controls, ranging from Wikiquotes to Wikipedia -- one of the most popular sites on the net. Phorm operates an opt-out system for sites and ISP customers, but it would be virtually impossible to verify if the company actually complied with such requests. "The Wikimedia Foundation requests that our web sites including Wikipedia.org and all related domains be excluded from scanning by the Phorm / BT Webwise system, as we consider the scanning and profiling of our visitors' behavior by a third party to be an infringement on their privacy," the email read, according to a Wikimedia blog post.

Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com like this http://killdo.de.gg travel,hotel,fun,hotel new,new offer,hotel best,best hotel,hotel travel,seo,backlinks,edu,gov,ads,indexing,bookmark,killgoggle,gogglesuck,goggle bookmark,kill goggle,yahoo,bing,indexing,quality links,linkwell,traffic boster,index best

A National Security Agency eavesdropping program exceeded legal limits intended to safeguard privacy, and officials have taken steps to bring the intercepts program into compliance, the Justice Department said Wednesday. The department, in a statement, said problems with the NSA program were uncovered as the Justice Department and National Security Agency were conducting routine oversight of intelligence activities to ensure compliance with laws and court orders. Attorney General Eric Holder has sought court approval to renew the NSA program after instituting new safeguards. The House intelligence committee was informed of the compliance issues and is conducting an inquiry, a House congressional official said. The New York Times on Wednesday reported on its Web site that the program intercepted private email messages and phone calls of Americans. However, intelligence officials have described the program as primarily searching for information based on data about communications, such as email addresses, subject headers and the time a message or phone call was placed. The Justice Department said officials notified the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of the problems with the NSA program and took "comprehensive steps" to correct the matter. "The Justice Department takes its national security oversight responsibilities seriously and works diligently to ensure that surveillance under established legal authorities complies with the nation's laws, regulations and policies, including those designed to protect privacy interests and civil liberties," the department said.

Like this http://www.hdfilmsaati.net Film,dvd,download,free download,product... ppc,adword,adsense,amazon,clickbank,osell,bookmark,dofollow,edu,gov,ads,linkwell,traffic,scor,serp,goggle,bing,yahoo.ads,ads network,ads goggle,bing,quality links,link best,ptr,cpa,bpa. www.killdo.de.gg

NEW YORK With increasing amounts of personal information liable to float around in cyberspace, consumers are deciding whether their data is safe in the hands of some public- and private-sector entities. A BBC World News America/Harris Poll finds a mixed verdict, with social-networking sites faring especially badly. In polling conducted last month, adults were asked to say how much trust they have in various sectors "to handle your personally identified information (such as credit-card information, contact information and so forth) in a properly confidential and secure manner." The poll's best scores went to "health providers, such as doctors and hospitals," with 20 percent of respondents expressing "a great deal of trust" and 55 percent "some trust" in these. Nineteen percent voiced "not much trust" and 7 percent "no trust at all" in this sector. At the bottom of the rankings were "social-networking sites (like Facebook or MySpace)," with 5 percent expressing a great deal of trust and 18 percent some trust in these. Thirty-one percent said they had not much trust and 46 percent no trust at all in these sites to safeguard personal information. (Whether people should direct their distrust to themselves for posting such information there in the first place is a question the survey didn't address.) Respondents were also wary of "search and portal sites (like Google or Yahoo!)" when it comes to keeping personal information secure: Ten percent voiced a great deal of trust, 39 percent some, 29 percent not much and 22 percent no trust at all. Even the federal government fared (slightly) better, with 13 percent expressing a great deal of trust, 41 percent some, 28 percent not much and 18 percent none. The scores were more positive for "banks and brokerage companies": 15 percent a great deal of trust, 43 percent some, 28 percent not much and 13 percent none. That was roughly on a par with the ratings for "my e-mail provider": 14 percent a great deal, 48 percent some, 27 p