Point? Privacy violations aren't new to the Internet, and any eventual policy should really take that into account.

You know, I've heard that a lot. But is it really true that no one tracks a shopper in a mall? While window shopping can be tracked on the Internet while your real-life shopping can't, that's about the only difference for a lot of people. If you use a credit card, you can be tracked on what you actually purchase quite easily (and that information is more valuable then what you simply look at, if you think about it). This particular aspect of privacy is one you gave up when you started using your credit card. The biggest difference is that on the Internet, you have no choice... you can't get out of the tracking.

Privacy on the Internet: "No one tracks a shopper as he visits various stores in a mall or keeps notes on what products he looks at. But in cyberspace, that shopper's behavior -- which Web sites he visits, and which ads he clicks on -- can all be instantly recorded and compiled, albeit through computer-based identifiers rather than by name. "

Now, let's try something new. I need some feedback and it's hard to get it. So, let's try out Userland's surveys. You must be logged in with a Userland account to vote on this, sorry.

From yesterday, in case you missed it: Manila Express(tm) for Netscape: I have created an interface to Manila Express(tm) for Netscape, but it is not quite as easy to set up. However, once set up, it is just as easy to use.

David Carter-Tod is reporting a problem I've never heard of, and I hope its just an isolated Windows oddity. Seems all of his bookmarklets have stopped functioning and are reporting "Access disallowed" as if they were trying to violate security. Update: I agree with his assessment, it's just a system glitch on his end.

Who needs new laws when you can creatively interpret old ones?

Interesting. . . Manila Express (both Userland's and my interface) seems to have difficulty with URLs with '#' in them.

The Risks Digest Volume 20: Issue 81: The attorney general of Michigan has filed a "notice of intended action" against DoubleClick, charging the Web advertising firm with "failing to disclose to Internet users that DoubleClick is systematically implanting electronic 'cookies,' or electronic surveillance files, on hard drives of users' computers without their knowledge or consent." Hey, that's my state! Go Michigan!