Forums
| BadPhorm - When good ISPs go bad! :: Forums :: Tips & Breaking News :: Media Sightings |
|
<< Previous thread | Next thread >> |
| Register - The Guardian ditches Phorm | ||
| Go to page << >> | |
|
Moderators: Jim Murray, narcosis, felixcatuk, Sammy
|
| Author | Post | ||
| Sammy |
| ||
   Registered Member #143 Joined: Sun Mar 09 2008, 08:36PMPosts: 191 | PhormUKPRteam You talk out of desperation. Phorm has taken a hit - simple and factual, maybe you'll learn from that!!! I don't trust you or Phorm.... And I am safe to speak for others of the same view - WE don't trust you or Phorm.... Leave OUR property alone... our Privacy is OUR right... No matter how you gloss it up, or in your case TRY, in vain, to gloss it up - its OUR property... Oh Easter was great - my kids painted some eggs with the Phorm Logo, and we had alot of fun watching them sink to the bottom of the Lake :o) -- Protect your Privacy; Stop Phorm Petition Government to Stop Phorm | Stop Phorm on Bebo Win a 12 Month Modelling Contract | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| Gleneagles |
| ||
 Registered Member #124 Joined: Fri Mar 07 2008, 06:53PMPosts: 26 | Hmm interesting and strange. It would be nice to know the story behind that one. Whether it 'was' in talks with Phorm about the OIX or if it never was going to be partner in the first place etc. It just seems weird as when the story began to break MySpace was cited as going to be part of the OIX from the outset. Which also raises the question as to why this nugget of information has only just been released. Either way it's another big player one way or the other. | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| andy2008 |
| ||
| Registered Member #217 Joined: Tue Mar 18 2008, 02:59PMPosts: 24 | PhormUKPRteam wrote ... Hi all Everyone have a good Easter? The Register article on the Guardian neatly highlights the two central issues here: protecting online privacy and needing ad funding to pay for Internet services. Of course people are concerned about the trade off they think they have to make between getting a personalised service on the one hand and giving up personal data on the other - we agree that they shouldn't have to make that pay off. So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised? Surely it is better by far to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories - like us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get. Online ad targeting is not going away; something the Guardian confirms in its statement. The reason that we've had such an enthusiastic response from the companies that we meet is that the Phorm system can earn ISPs and publishers - big and small - more money to plough back into the services you receive today - most of them for free. If not ad funding, then what other way is the Internet going to be paid for? Most Internet publishers have abandoned subscriptions because not enough people are actually prepared to pay when it comes down to it. And also, as per Oblonsky's post above - it's not weird, it's plain wrong - MySpace is not a partner of ours and The Register has now corrected that The only ISP's that need ad funding are the ones who shouldnt be offering internet services in the first place. Its no suprise BT , Talk Talk CPW and virgin media were in discussions with you because they are the 3 major ISP's making a loss. Why you ask ? simply because the product/services which they offer are of such poor quality that when the customer sees for themself how poor the products/services they offer are they transfer to an ISP who can offer decent services/products. Also you say pay for the internet ? no one owns the internet. The internet exists as an entity in itself. ISP's merely provide a means to connect to it and thats all ISP's should do. They do not have a right in selling customer Data which does not belong to them in the first place and they sure as hell have no right allowing a company with a strong history in spyware/adware into its networks. The ISP's might not understand the technology which you propose but we do. We know where this is headed and unless we make a stand against your illegal activities then Jo public will be conned into assuming their data is safe. BT, Talk Talk CPW AND VM FAIL in so many ways that they should not be in business. Their networks are in such poor shape, they are throttled so badly that people may as well be on dial up, they are unable to provide a successful means to connect to the internet that by law they should not be allowed to call themselves an internet service provider. However from research ive done i know of an article I read where between BT and Phorm they predicted the broadband model would reach a point where broadband would be free with targeted advertising. If your an ISP looking to increase subscriber base but cant retain customers/generate new ones what do you do ? oh yeah give it away for free. Well surely people would accept free broadband for targeted ads ? well no not really. Because you then saturate performance of the ISP network to a point that its not Broadband any more its just dial up. I know how much it irritated me with BT and the [READ THE AUP!] poor broadband performance that I moved ISP. Another thing Phorm has failed to grasp is the changing broadband market were in. LLU technology offers a vastly superior product/performance that im very happy to pay £20 to £30 a month to my ISP for supplying me decent product/tech support. Why would people want to carry on paying BT, CPW Talk Talk and VM for broadband when they can get better products/services with another supplier. BT, CPW Talk Talk and VM should not be in the ISP business. Hence why Phorm discussed giving it away for free ? well no one wants broadband from these companies as the product is poor and no one wants broadband with targeted ads so Phorm makes a double fail in that respect. Oh and drop the act about how Phorm is so safe and secure and stop lying for a change ? [ Edited Wed Mar 26 2008, 01:10PM ] "I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes." | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| SqueakyWheel |
| ||
| Registered Member #37 Joined: Wed Feb 27 2008, 03:58PMPosts: 17 | PhormUKPRteam wrote ... So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised? I'll answer that with a large YES. Both systems are distinctly evil however as you have said ads are a somewhat necessary evil for todays internet. I have no problem with these companies storing such info because they only get to see what I want them to see, when I want them to see it, unlike your system which can see *everything* I do. I can't hide certain websites from your view like I can with the above example, I can't stop you snooping at private information where you are not wanted and the only way out of is is a weak cookie based system and a promise that you won't store the data..or a change of ISP. It still baffles me how you can claim to be more privacy conscious when you are/will be spying on every single thing I browse, profiling it even if I opt-out, compared to a small slice that I can control. | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| skyuser.co.uk |
| ||
| Registered Member #207 Joined: Tue Mar 18 2008, 02:54AMPosts: 10 | Hi PhormUKPRteam Perhaps you should have this song as your company theme song? Phorm Theme Good job Phorm is not in the shipping business eh? | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| mrjolly |
| ||
| Registered Member #25 Joined: Tue Feb 26 2008, 12:22PMPosts: 11 | Good afternoon Phorm team! Please can you answer a couple of questions? If you don't store any browsing histories, how come the OIX website says: "...For example, Travel advertisers will be able to target messages to anyone seeing the keywords "Paris holiday" either as a search or inside the text of any page with timing of three times in an hour.. ...Advertisers create customised channels using behavioural keywords - keywords derived from searches, URLs, and contextual analysis of pages visited, with recency and frequency" In order to know the frequency someone visits a page you are going to have to record that page address against their profile complete with a list of times they visited it too, so you can tell if they visited it in the three hour example mentioned above. So how does your system know what time a page is visited and the amount of times a page is visited by someone if it doesn't actually store the URL of the page? Also, I've mentioned this in a few posts but don't think I've seen an answer yet. Lots of sites have Terms & Conditions which explicitly deny data mining, extraction etc. of their content. Lots of these sites are also copyrighted. Could yourselves or the ISP's installing your system be held accountable for copyright theft? It could be argued that you are profiting by mining this copyrighted data which doesn't belong to you or the person viewing the page to build your profiles. If I was to visit a page that contained my name multiple times (ie. a directory service) so it appeared in the top 10 words or I was to search for my own name, would your system then be storing my details either in my browsing history, the keywords I search for or any other part of the system? If not, how does the system know what my name is, and what data identifies me? Thanks! | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| TheOtherSteve |
| ||
| Registered Member #178 Joined: Thu Mar 13 2008, 03:55PMPosts: 46 | "So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised?" No. Which is exactly why I take steps to prevent it from happening. "Surely it is better by far to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories" Surely it's better not to have someone install Deep Packet Inspection kit at my ISP in contravention of the RIPA, then process sensitive information whether I consent to it or not in violation of the DPA (remember, you have still processed it, even you subsequently discard it). And then there were the trials last year, where there wasn't even the possibility of "informed consent" as a defence. Surely it's better to have dealings with a company that just tells the truth and answers questions, rather than one who hires a whole bunch of PR bods to flood the internet with spin in a childishly transparent and clearly ineffective attempt to "massage" the rising tide of negative opinion. If there was really nothing to complain about, no one would be complaining. Surely it would have been better had my ISP not climbed into bed with a scumware company, then lied about it, then lied about it some more, then had to rely on you lot to try and clear up the extraordinary mess that they've made for themselves. "ike us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get." No, it isn't, under any circumstances. Because now there are choices I can make that will enhance my privacy. Once you start letting random people install eavesdropping equipment in your ISP network, you effectively HAVE NO PRIVACY, because it is impossible to trust that it isn't/can't be/won't be abused. It is, simply, a single point of failure, operated by an untrusted source, especially in the case of Phorm. That's basic risk management, with which I would expect CDR to be familiar, so please, get some new arguments, because "other people are spying on you, so you shouldn't complain if we do it, and we promise to be nicer about it" is starting to wear a little thin. | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| Midnight_Voice |
| ||
| Registered Member #180 Joined: Thu Mar 13 2008, 08:51PMPosts: 41 | PhormUKPRteam wrote ... Hi all Everyone have a good Easter? The Register article on the Guardian neatly highlights the two central issues here: ---------------------------------- As Pontius Pilate is reputed to have said, I'd have had a better Easter if you hadn't risen again. But I do love your spin; it's "the Register article on the Guardian" (nice and neutral) and not "First passenger deserts the sinking ship". Which desertion highlights the one central issue here: what Phorm are proposing is not just unpopular but positively distasteful, and the Guardian have decided they don't want to be associated with it. Well, good for them. And good for us; now the pressure is three-pronged - on Phorm (who will go down fighting), on the ISPs (who are starting to waver) and on the advertisers (and let's see who is next to defect). No advertisers, no revenue. No revenue, no business model. Poof! And I don't know what payment terms you PR chappies are on with Phorm, but you might want to get the invoice in before all the money is gone ... Big Brother: a programme people watch, or a program watching people? | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| BexTech |
| ||
 Registered Member #9 Joined: Sat Feb 23 2008, 12:42PMPosts: 4 | Excellent news. The sooner this Phorm business goes out of business the better. No one wants this system, just wish they'd get that through their thick heads. Phorm is a parasite. [ Edited Wed Mar 26 2008, 02:40PM ] | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| Oblonsky |
| ||
 Registered Member #132 Joined: Sat Mar 08 2008, 10:59AMPosts: 91 | PhormUKPRteam wrote ... And also, as per Oblonsky's post above - it's not weird, it's plain wrong - MySpace is not a partner of ours and The Register has now corrected that Okay, so you put El Reg straight, but why weren't you so keen to correct Jemima Kiss on her piece on Feb 14th: " Phorm is already working with ad agencies and partner websites, including the Financial Times, the Guardian, MySpace and Universal McCann ... " Maybe back then it looked good to investors and potential partners alike to leave that uncorrected? Or was Phorm in talks with MySpace which have subsequently fallen through?? I know you're only probably a year or 2 out of business school but surely you can do better than jumping on each and every comment, comment by comment, without realising that, although we all are naturally suspicious, there may in fact be a reason for our suspicions?! | ||
| Back to top | | ||
| Go to page << >> | |
Powered by e107 Forum System