Author Topic: Phorm in the USA (Read 5147 times)

sandyman · « **on:** March 28, 2008, 04:32:08 AM »

Some of you may recall a post from Highmac (Neil) a few weeks ago about Tim Berners-Lee objecting to Net Tracking. This is being planned in the UK by a company called Phorm and the three largest ISP's. Well just to keep you up to date Phorm are in negotiations with AT&T, Comcast & Verizon in order to bring you the "benefits" of their wonderful system.

Sir Tim said his data and web history belonged to him.
"I think consumers rights in this are very important - we haven't seen the results of these systems being used He said: "It's mine - you can't have it. If you want to use it for something, then you have to negotiate with me. I have to agree, I have to understand what I'm getting in return."

In essence what they plan on doing is intercepting your web browsing data stream, sending it to a profiling server and then serving you up ads based on the results. Even if you opt out the data will still be sent to the profiling server.

It should also be borne in mind that the guy behind Phorm has a history of being involved in Spyware, his programmers are based in Russia and the servers in China.

Personally speaking if my ISP carries on with its plans to introduce this I will drop them immediately. I pay them to provide me with a data conduit, nothing else.

Sandy

Paddy · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2008, 07:28:00 AM »

Lovely. And I'm sure Rogers here in Canada has taken notice as well. Good old Ted never saw a money-making deal he didn't like. (Gotta break the top 100 on the Forbes list of billionaires dontcha know...)

Not that there aren't other companies already doing this in the US - although I'm not aware that they have Russian and Chinese ties.

As I posted in the earlier thread on this topic: Adzilla and NebuAd sell exactly this sort of service:

http://venturebeat.com/tag/coadzilla/

QUOTE

NebuAd offers its packet inspection software to internet service providers, the services you use to access the internet. NebuAd then turns around and provides the traffic information to advertising networks.

QUOTE

ISPs are also required to mail or email documents to their users asking for permission to track their surfing habits, Dykes said. There is more than one way of going about getting agreements, however, and our concern is if ISPs prefer to simply bury a clause in the inevitable legal agreements that accompany every modern service.

Finally, users will be able to permanently opt-out through a separate NebuAd service called Fair Eagle, assuming they know of its existence. NebuAd, in response, says its opt-out option is obvious enough; it is stated on its Web site.

Still doesn't give one the warm and fuzzies, does it? It will be nteresting to see if Phorm will have to provide the same complete opt out option - I'm not sure if the legalities are different in the US.

Xairbusdriver · « **Reply #2 on:** March 28, 2008, 10:26:02 AM »

Changing providers may be easy or even possible if/when they all take advantage of us the service. The only two local options for (two-way) broadband service are Comcast and AT&T. Truly between two "hard places!"

Highmac · « **Reply #3 on:** March 28, 2008, 11:13:36 AM »

A link to the Berners-Lee interview for anyone who missed it.

On reflection, Sandy, even a change of ISP may not help. There are only two practical ways of getting broadband in the UK - through cable (VirginMedia) or over a landline.... that means a BT line (which is my route to VirginMedia). So if BT signs up to Phorm, it probably doesn't matter which ISP you go to. You can bet BT will have a clause in its contracts with ISPs..... Or am I being even more cynical/naive than usual

sandyman · « **Reply #4 on:** March 28, 2008, 11:47:28 AM »

QUOTE(Highmac @ Mar 28 2008, 04:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A link to the Berners-Lee interview for anyone who missed it.

On reflection, Sandy, even a change of ISP may not help. There are only two practical ways of getting broadband in the UK - through cable (VirginMedia) or over a landline.... that means a BT line (which is my route to VirginMedia). So if BT signs up to Phorm, it probably doesn't matter which ISP you go to. You can bet BT will have a clause in its contracts with ISPs..... Or am I being even more cynical/naive than usual

Neil
Because of the way the system works other ISP's who lease bandwidth from BT do not have to be part of this scam. Some have already stated that they will never be party to this scheme or others like it.

The good news is that even our bunch of elected ~~morons~~ sorry MP's

have decided to look into Phorm The Register. I'd write to my MP but phrases including the words Chocolate and Fireguard spring to mind when I think of him

Sandy

Highmac · « **Reply #5 on:** March 28, 2008, 12:52:29 PM »

I know what you mean..... ours is standing down at the next election and I'd guess a good many people in the constituency don't even know his name

PS - thanks for the PM!

Gregg · « **Reply #6 on:** April 07, 2008, 09:09:56 PM »

QUOTE(sandyman @ Mar 28 2008, 04:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...Phorm are in negotiations with AT&T, Comcast & Verizon in order to bring you the "benefits" of their wonderful system.

This may be bad form, but I can't help but notice the grammar. I first learned of the "British" way when working with a gent from London. He would always use "are" when I would use "is". So, you probably missed my thread many months ago about a headline in the newspaper. I can't remember it, except for the crucial part. It was something containing "The Couple Are". So is that how you'd say it over there, or would you say "The Couple Is"?

sandyman · « **Reply #7 on:** April 08, 2008, 04:12:23 AM »

QUOTE(Gregg @ Apr 8 2008, 03:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

QUOTE(sandyman @ Mar 28 2008, 04:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...Phorm are in negotiations with AT&T, Comcast & Verizon in order to bring you the "benefits" of their wonderful system.

This may be bad form, but I can't help but notice the grammar. I first learned of the "British" way when working with a gent from London. He would always use "are" when I would use "is". So, you probably missed my thread many months ago about a headline in the newspaper. I can't remember it, except for the crucial part. It was something containing "The Couple Are". So is that how you'd say it over there, or would you say "The Couple Is"?

Strictly speaking I should probably have said Phorm is rather than are. However both would be acceptable to most people over here. I would say the couple are since there are two people involved. However the finer points of English grammar are not one of my intellectual strengths. I was taught quite a lot of grammar at primary school but almost none at high school. I should point out that our High Schools were different to what Americans call High Schools.

I probably know more about Fench grammar than English grammar.

Sandy

Gregg · « **Reply #8 on:** April 08, 2008, 07:14:23 AM »

Sandy, I believe that most "Bringlish" speakers would say "Phorm are". That's my observation anyway. And the logic is apparently the same as yours for "couple". The "Anglish" logic is that the word itself is singular, so the conjugation of the verb follows the rule for non-plural subjects. Over here, both choices are not accepted. You seem to indicate that the British are more forgiving, unless we're talking Henry Higgins.

Xairbusdriver · « **Reply #9 on:** April 08, 2008, 12:04:02 PM »

QUOTE

Over here, both choices are not accepted.

I beg to differ. There's no problem with that pform of English. I assumed "Phorm" had more than one employee!

But I still have trouble with "the data are!"

What if there is only one bit of data (a data 'point')? Is it still plural?

All y'all just keep us on our toes!

kimmer · « **Reply #10 on:** April 08, 2008, 12:20:19 PM »

QUOTE(Gregg @ Apr 8 2008, 05:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

... so the conjugation of the verb follows the rule for non-plural subjects.

Oh lordy. I hated English class. I still don't remember all this stuff. Makes my head hurt.

QUOTE

Over here, both choices are not accepted. You seem to indicate that the British are more forgiving, unless we're talking Henry Higgins.

I don't know, Gregg. If we can turn "disrespect" into "diss", or say "I googled that", and all the other weird things we seem to come up with; why is are vs is an issue?

sandyman · « **Reply #11 on:** April 08, 2008, 02:45:55 PM »

QUOTE(Gregg @ Apr 8 2008, 01:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sandy, I believe that most "Bringlish" speakers would say "Phorm are". That's my observation anyway. And the logic is apparently the same as yours for "couple". The "Anglish" logic is that the word itself is singular, so the conjugation of the verb follows the rule for non-plural subjects. Over here, both choices are not accepted. You seem to indicate that the British are more forgiving, unless we're talking Henry Higgins.

Or in Cockney, a la Eliza "'enry 'iggins"

"Anglish" is nowadays very flexible

Sandy

Highmac · « **Reply #12 on:** April 09, 2008, 07:10:04 AM »

You know, this is the sort of thread I used to love before we split to Tech and Community

The papers I work for have a 'singular' style for companies and groups (though police and football clubs are plural - I have no idea why!), but it does lead to grammatical complications (as in the previously mentioned couple). Getting round it, to avoid it reading strangely, is to refer to managers or bosses to get into plural. The company is.... Company bosses are....

Gregg · « **Reply #13 on:** April 09, 2008, 07:25:44 AM »

...and if it's "the couple are" then is it "the couples is"

??

Editors violate the rules all the time. I've noticed a preponderence of paried sentence fragments, with the second one commonly beginning with "Which". Apparently they think their readers will get lost in a long, complicated sentence. (...or the typesetter lost the comma box)

And speaking of the family of "a" plurals, I also see many stories about referendums (sic), or hear about them on the broadcast news.

Over here, most sports teams have names that are already plural. It throws the journalists for a loop when one isn't.

And speaking of sports and grammar, this combines the two!

sandyman · « **Reply #14 on:** April 09, 2008, 08:34:36 AM »

How to beat Phorm, for now anyway, The Guardian use Safari. It's a pity Safari doesn't have all the nice extensions that Firefox has though

Still, I suppose I could try installing Privoxy on my router. That would replace some, but not all, of them.

Sandy

News:

Author Topic: Phorm in the USA (Read 5147 times)