Quote:
Originally Posted by Pasanonic
It is just Kent loosely referring to his view that everywhere we go on the web is followed closely by google and that they store all that information against our IP for eons. His view is also that because google do 'this' then Phorm should be allowed to do 'that' even though 'this' and 'that' are chalk and cheese.
That really is what Kent's attitude boils down to. He's annoyed that we accept google and won't accept Phorm. He thinks because Google merely exist that everything his company does is valid and he has a little bit of a hard time coping with the fact that nobody outside of Phorm sees things that way.
Trotting out Google and its practices with the advertising tech it deploys is his favourite thing. Given that there is no correlation between what Google do and what Phorm proposes beyond the word 'advert' I must admit I admire his gall. He must have a huge set of nads to keep repeating stuff even he must know is pig swill.
|
well If Kent only meant Google and other search engines then his statement that
everything you do when online is stored against your IP address is just plain wrong and should have been challenged ??
All your searches being stored is very different to all your online activity.
Searches would be 1% of my online activity if even that....