- From: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 12:15:01 -0400
- To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Cc: TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
Le 2 juin 2010 à 11:14, Tim Berners-Lee a écrit : > Should browsers ensure that Copy is always a read-only operation, unless they have INSTALLED code to do something different? Browsers could, but not sure that would work for a long time. Working in a Web agency and seeing how the business is working (mostly based on marketing and personal data profiling for advertisement), there is a little chance that services such as the one in question has any kind of architectural issues with it. If we think about the Web ecosystem, the advertisement and tracking industry is a real player into it with a lot of money. Google is an advertisement agency for example. The question then becomes not how to forbid abuse of the architecture, but 1. how the architecture gives the possibility for tracking 2. how the architecture gives the choice to users to say no to this tracking (globally or atomically) Not fun, but I do not see another possibility for now. :/ :( ps: and in case, it is not clear. I really think the service in questions is bad, and should not exist at all. There are other things like the "Facebook Like" button too, which tracks FB users even not clicking the button, or the infamous Google Analytics. :) -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2010 16:15:20 UTC