Quote:
Originally Posted by 80/20Thinking
You'll understand, I'm sure, why I'm resisting saying anything that could fuel speculation, but you've hit the nail on the head. If we're in the business (at least in part) of finding possible solutions, the browser manufacturers are massively relevant. But talk about a hornet nest....
Simon
|
Yes, I understand. I face such problems every day of implementing clients' requirements, which often include fist-slamming assertions that a feature must operate in a stated way, despite the limitations of the browser and corporate-mandated security zone settings etc.
At the risk of making a sweeping statement and being proved wholly wrong, the crux of the problem is and always will be consumer buy-in. Choosing and installing a new browser is relatively simple. With great open source browsers being available, if the big 3/4 implement something that the community doesn't like, a new branch and branding will emerge without this feature. FireKitten?!
One could assume intra-ISP profiling provided the answer but again both the consumer and the online community can play a part in forcing corporate hands because of (a) the power of viral messaging (switch from VM/BT/TT because of Phorm) and (b) the amount of user and hobbyist generated content, which, given a working Phorm detector could be used to deliver a direct message to anyone visiting from a participating ISP.
One avenue that hasn't been explored on this forum is the role that single-sign on (global identity/identity management/online passport/...) systems could play in behavioural targeting. No doubt the bods at Yahoo, Google and Microsoft are more than on top of this. Of course the challenge will still be getting ordinary websites to participate in data profiling, a problem intra-ISP solutions don't have.
But I think the only fair way to get this data is to pay the websites themselves for it, that way the income rightly goes to the content producers and not the service providers.