johnnie
msg:4038888 | 6:01 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
In your face, Google.
|
dertyfern
msg:4038895 | 6:13 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Great timing by Yahoo but unfortunately not many will care about this.
|
rj87uk
msg:4038910 | 6:42 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| Great timing by Yahoo but unfortunately not many will care about this. |
|
I think many people will care about this as with anything to do with online privacy.
|
yaix2
msg:4038942 | 7:34 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
What? Yahoo did something innovative?!
|
AndyA
msg:4038954 | 7:44 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Wow. Yahoo's timing couldn't have been better. Folks, people ARE concerned about Google, I heard some girls talking about it at lunch today. A couple of them had read about it, and the bottom line was they all thought Google was SPYING on them. They said they've all made other SE's their default search. They didn't come across to me as particularly web savvy, either, because one of them didn't know how to adjust her browser to delete temporary internet files on shut down, and another one had to tell her how to do it. Time will tell, but this may have legs.
|
AndyA
msg:4038957 | 7:46 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
It's kind of shocking, actually, to see what they know about you.
|
oddsod
msg:4038989 | 8:22 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| Folks, people ARE concerned about Google |
|
Unfortunately, the level of concern is dismal. Even theregister's readers - a typically tech savvy bunch - don't recognise the issue. They seem to see it as an anti-SEO move so they are whooping for joy (if one is to go by the comments they are leaving).
|
signor_john
msg:4039003 | 8:33 pm on Dec 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| Great timing by Yahoo but unfortunately not many will care about this. |
|
Not many Yaho users will even know about this, since they'll find the Ad Interest Manager only if they: - Go to the "Privacy Policy" page (which is accessible via a tiny link in Yahoo's page footer), and... - Use the link on that page to reach the Ad Interest Manager page. In the real world, the Ad Interest Manager won't just be ignored by the average user; it won't even be seen by the average user.
|
kksite123
msg:4039415 | 12:02 pm on Dec 8, 2009 (gmt 0) |
They will know about it if there is enough media attention for this development. The media attention itself may be reason for a number of users to switch to Yahoo when these users perceive that Yahoo is not "spying" on them "like Google does".
|
signor_john
msg:4039500 | 3:39 pm on Dec 8, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| They will know about it if there is enough media attention for this development. |
|
But there won't won't be enough media attention. Even if there were, such news stories are read by only a small subset of the Web population and disappear after a few days. (That's probably in Yahoo's best interests, by the way. Privacy policies and related tools are merely PR and CYA ploys, which is why they're so well-hidden on most sites. Does anyone here seriously think that Yahoo! wants people to opt out of behavorial or interest-based ads?)
|
alexcole
msg:4044999 | 7:43 pm on Dec 17, 2009 (gmt 0) |
I believe Google already has a tool that lets you "manage the information they know about you" Google Ad Preferences - [google.com...] Either way, it's hard to take Yahoo seriously. Hopefully this new tool actually works
|
hyperlexic
msg:4058529 | 7:29 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I don't think it's fair to say Yahoo hasn't been innovative. Yahoo has some of the coolest services out there. YQL is really amazing. Google has nothing like that in their API set. Really, with YQL now EVERY site has a real-time data API even if they don't know it. Pipes is pretty cool. Clunky interface, but still better than most rss feeds dressed up as 'web services' out there today. Delicious is indispensable for me. Flickr really pushed the bar in terms of microformats and provided an innovative social network with actual value. Yahoo has some of the smartest people working for them like Doug Crockford. It's too bad much of this stuff is probably on the chopping block as they focus strictly on content.
|
|
