Home
Adriana Lukas's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
this may be the realise of the online marketing but that doesn't make it right. to argue that personalisation is a fair price for customer data implies an agreement by the customer somehow. I don't have much choice and opting out is hard, so this is not a fair exchange.
in list: VRM
-
Internet advertising is growing faster than advertising in any other medium -- an average of 14.6% per year, according to ZenithOptimedia, a media services agency. Online advertising will overtake newspapers to capture 18.9% of the global ad market by 2013, becoming the world's second-largest advertising medium next to television, the agency forecasts.
-
In 2011, Facebook will likely amass $3.8 billion in global ad revenues, predicts digital intelligence firm eMarketer. The social media giant now gathers data from more than 800 million active users who post in 70 languages. And search giant Google, which pulled in $9.72 billion in advertising revenues in the third quarter alone, makes 96% of its revenues from advertising. In regulatory filings, Google attributes its healthy profit to "the relevance and quality of both our search results and the advertisements displayed."
- 7 more annotation(s)...
good analysis in the post and especially in the comment by 'Legal Genius'.
it happened here and will happen again. Until we get our own 'cloud'.
-
They’ve lost all the content that people put in there. They’ve lost all the pictures, descriptions, and files. But hey, no problem because you can just go ahead and rebuild that for them.
No.
People put their time and energy in there and it disappeared. Yes, it was a free service, but no, that doesn’t excuse it. Say I offer to hold your wallet for you while you swim. When you get out of the pool some of the pictures are missing. Is it ok that I wasn’t charging you to hold your wallet?
-
Add Sticky NoteThis is the fundamental problem with software as a service – you don’t own it, you don’t control it, and there’s no recourse to the providers like Ning. It’s why I like to have my own cloud. Cloud computing, software in the cloud, these terms are names for the same basic idea. Digital Sharecropping. You’ll get the resources you need for little or no money and you can produce value there for you and yours, but you never own it, you can’t take it somewhere else, and you have very little bargaining power for changes. This is why Facebook is so troubling.
-
Adriana Lukas on 2010-02-26absolutely. getting your own cloud is tricky though and requires rewiring of much of what the web is now designed to do. themineproject.org is one such attempt.
-
"The lesson here is: 'Don’t bet the farm on a single cloud provider,'" says Craig Balding, founder of cloudsecurity.org and a security practitioner at a Fortune 500 company. "It's common sense really. But people get lulled into thinking they site is always going to be available [when they host with a single provider]."
the Data Liberation Front - would have that name for MINT initiative if not already taken. But My Information, Not Theirs works too! :)
arstechnica's measured response to a trolling book by a dysfunctional writer's whose diatribe against anything open, technological and online makes Luddites look like technological pioneers!
fairly encouraging. though I'd still like to state out of my personal data.
-
In practice therefore the right to privacy cannot any longer be defined simply as the right of the individual to be let alone. We all want too much from the state for this to be a helpful guideline by itself. What technology has not however changed, it seems to me, is the fundamental point that the individual is the rightful owner of personal information and that the state is merely possessor and should behave as a responsible custodian.
-
Today, privacy must mean a clear statement on the part of those who have custody of personal information of their purpose in retaining it and of their commitment to its proper management.
- 6 more annotation(s)...
Marcus: privacy offline has always been exclusive why should it be different online
Bruce: lack of control over your data is a legal problem
-
I'm pretty sure that, if I joined the tinfoil hat brigade, I'd be able to quickly assemble a communications system that was so secure it'd be practically unusable.
-
People who are using public data networks to do naughty, terroristic, or counter-revolutionary things have simply got to protect themselves. To a government or business, privacy looks indistinguishable from sedition or crime.
Privacy has always been something special, enjoyed by those who are wealthy and powerful enough to afford guards, walls and lawmakers. It speaks well of techno-geek society that we tried--and tried hard--to democratize the data networks and protect their users, but the end-game was inevitable. From one side, you're either a member of the tinfoil hat brigade or an activist Cypherpunk. Seen from the other side, you're a pre-selected terrorism suspect or a blob of marketing data waiting to be analyzed and sold.
- 3 more annotation(s)...
sharing is always better than hoarding. I think it's a matter of finding a way to make money because of something, not with something, especially if that something is knowledge. Much harder to do when it is knowledge. :)
much confusion about 'data' and 'ownership'. as usual
buzzwords galore! how to learn to own customers. slavery's alive!
does it mean that community is provided as a service the same way software is? I.e. doesn't belong to me and I can't really drive it. SaaS takes the 'provider' model to extremes. nothing is 'owned' by the users. Community as a service modelled on that is
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in ownership
-
Technology
Giving Students Ownership of...
Items: 126 | Visits: 18
Created by: Liz Gilbert
-
Intellectual Property
Resources to inform, and mea...
Items: 4 | Visits: 28
Created by: Eric Schiff
Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »
Join Diigo