<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: From the annals of ineffective security</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.edbott.com/weblog/?feed=rss2&#038;p=564" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.edbott.com/weblog/?p=564</link>
	<description>Helping PC users make sense of Microsoft software since 1991</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:54:09 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Cowper</title>
		<link>http://www.edbott.com/weblog/?p=564&#038;cpage=1#comment-1201</link>
		<dc:creator>John Cowper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.edbott.com/wordpress/?p=564#comment-1201</guid>
		<description>Ed

As a teacher of e-marketing I often have to explain to quite proficient computer users just what a cookie is and/or does. Further, I believe that right from the commercialisation of the internet in the early 90s those companies/sites placing cookies surely had some kind of obligation to the computer owner to explain why these small bits of code they were being placed on their machine. 

To take an not so extreme example, if someone comes into your home its called trespassing, if someone places a listening or camera device in your study or office (or bedroom)its considered a gross invasion of privacy (and illegal in most democracies without a court order). So I can understand why the computer user would remove the &#039;offending&#039; items ... particularly if you are new to computers! (That is, one of those we marketing types call the &quot;late adopters!&quot;)

I fear that in this security conscious world of the early 21st-century most people would consider anything placed anywhere that collects information about them with great suspicion. 

Maybe an education program is needed to explain just what a cookie is; otherwise I fear that some vote conscious member or parliament/congress will move against them! And I have a feeling that most people would agree with them!

Cheers from Sunny Australia to you and your readers

John Cowper 
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ed</p>
<p>As a teacher of e-marketing I often have to explain to quite proficient computer users just what a cookie is and/or does. Further, I believe that right from the commercialisation of the internet in the early 90s those companies/sites placing cookies surely had some kind of obligation to the computer owner to explain why these small bits of code they were being placed on their machine. </p>
<p>To take an not so extreme example, if someone comes into your home its called trespassing, if someone places a listening or camera device in your study or office (or bedroom)its considered a gross invasion of privacy (and illegal in most democracies without a court order). So I can understand why the computer user would remove the &#8216;offending&#8217; items &#8230; particularly if you are new to computers! (That is, one of those we marketing types call the &#8220;late adopters!&#8221;)</p>
<p>I fear that in this security conscious world of the early 21st-century most people would consider anything placed anywhere that collects information about them with great suspicion. </p>
<p>Maybe an education program is needed to explain just what a cookie is; otherwise I fear that some vote conscious member or parliament/congress will move against them! And I have a feeling that most people would agree with them!</p>
<p>Cheers from Sunny Australia to you and your readers</p>
<p>John Cowper</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
