All Tweets #4,353–#4,402
All 8,402 tweets, newest first. Not including retweets.
-
Blue or Green text bubble? « At first, Apple engineers just wanted to be able to easily identify iMessages when working with other texting formats as they developed their system, he said. The effect just stuck as it moved forward for consumer rollout. » wsj.com/articles/why-apples-imessage-is-winning-teens-dread-the-green-text-bubble-11641618009Permalink
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -2 🙁
-
@etopie @enmarchefr pas vraiment en effet :-) merci pour le pingPermalink
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
"La république en marche", by Google & Facebook. C'est ça la start-up nation 😜 @etopie/1476947191411392518Permalink
♻️ 4 Retweets
❤️ 7 Favorites
Mood +2 🙂
-
... I still see a 'scorecardresearch' UID cookie (Comscore) 🤪 3/Permalink
Mood 0
-
Then after objecting to "legitimate interest" everywhere (painfull), and especially to Comscore... 2/Permalink
Mood +1 🙂
-
Quick test on the @BBC website, at launch I already have a chartbeat cookie. Consent should be required AFAIK 🤷♂️ 1/ @alexanderhanff/1478711101005176832Permalink
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +2 🙂
-
Le capitalisme de surveillance, appliqué à l'automobile. On parle ici des voitures Citroën, Peugeot, Fiat, Opel, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Lancia... 👏 @faure_t/1479000933002616833Permalink
♻️ 7 Retweets
❤️ 6 Favorites
Mood +2 🙂
-
« Imagine if every time you interacted with a website in Chrome, your request first went to Google before being routed to the destination and back. That’s the situation with ethereum today. » 🧐 moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.htmlPermalink
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
RT @fourmeux: En introduisant des paiements via une cryptomonnaie anonyme, Signal pourrait servir à blanchir de l'argent ou des transaction…
-
RT @interchu: #thread 1/6 Pour fonctionner le @HealthDataHub a besoin d'une autorisation @CNIL de fonctionnement. La demande a finalement é…
-
See below ⤵️ @pixeldetracking/1476143630041690115Permalink
♻️ 2 Retweets
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood 0
-
👋 @amazon, can I cancel my Prime subscription in 1 click? @linakhanFTC/1479162568799395840Permalink
♻️ 2 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood +1 🙂
-
RT @johnwilander: At least one use of the sensor is allegedly to detect fraudulent ad clicks:
-
@johnwilander from @btsavage, the accelerometer is related to fraud detection @btsavage/1463568018227662855Permalink
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 14 Favorites
Mood -4 🙁
-
RT @robinberjon: Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA), a proposal for privacy-preserving attribution from @taubeneck, @btsavage (Faceboo…
-
La publicité programmatique est une catastrophe pour la vie privée, le système de consentement mis en place par l’IAB est une blague, épisode 456 digiday.com/marketing/the-real-issue-here-is-around-publisher-trust-advertisers-on-alert-as-cookie-consent-concerns-rise/Permalink
♻️ 5 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood -3 🙁
-
En quoi la publicité programmatique est problématique sur les podcasts (sans parler du tracking et de la perte de revenu) : vous perdez le contrôle sur les publicités diffusées. theverge.com/2022/1/4/22865034/podcast-programmatic-spotify-ad-networkPermalink
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
L’adtech est en train de pourrir les podcasts 👏 @marcoarment/1478545696475303941Permalink
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood +2 🙂
-
RT @RomainHeuillard: L'article à propos des CMP illicites de Google et Facebook derrière le cookie wall de Capital.fr Qui dit…
-
RT @a_maehl: "Change it back?" asks Google when you start using Chrome after adding the DuckDuckGo extension. During download the user al…
-
Vous voulez vraiment utiliser un moteur de recherche qui respecte votre vie privée ?! 😈 @a_maehl/1478795836012343297Permalink
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood +1 🙂
-
RT @fourmeux: Et comme cadeau d'anniversaire, la CNIL s'offre Google et Facebook ! Joyeux anniversaire 🎁🎂 cnil.fr/fr/cookies-la-cnil-sanctionne-google-hauteur-de-150-millions-deuros-et-facebook-hauteur-de-60-millions
-
RT @reesmarc: 2001 : "Don't be evil", devise de Google. 2022 : Google considère "que ni la directive ePrivacy, ni le RGPD, ni l’article 82…
-
RT @reesmarc: Ces montants sont une poussière, de l'argent de poche pour ces géants. Ok. Mais... Ne jamais minorer les conséquences d'une…
-
RT @reesmarc: "Cookies : la CNIL sanctionne GOOGLE à hauteur de 150 millions d’euros et FACEBOOK à hauteur de 60 millions d’euros pour non-…
-
Affaire à suivre : Google et Facebook ont 3 mois pour corriger le tir ⏰ Sinon ils devront payer une astreinte de… 100.000€ par jour de retard. Pas sûr que ce montant soit vraiment dissuasif 🤔 @CNIL/1479000269031682048Permalink
♻️ 16 Retweets
❤️ 24 Favorites
Mood 0
-
RT @N0thing2Hide: Rappel : la collecte de données est le centre du modèle d’affaires de Google. Exemple avec les étapes de création d’un co…
-
Une option un peu plus radicale pour lutter contre une boite toxique telle que Facebook, envoyer son PDG en prison youtu.be/sAjm3-IaRtI 4/Permalink
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 5 Favorites
Mood -2 🙁
-
Hâte de voir la suite 🍿 Et bravo la CNIL, même si la somme peut paraître dérisoire c’est une avancée importante 👏 6/Permalink
♻️ 4 Retweets
❤️ 10 Favorites
Mood +2 🙂
-
Est-ce une erreur de Politico ? Le Conseil d’État avait validé la précédente sanction geste.fr/le-conseil-detat-a-valide-la-sanction-de-100-millions-deuros-prononcee-par-la-cnil-a-lencontre-de-google-llc-et-google-ireland-limited-pour-non-respect-de-la-legislation-sur-les-cookies/ 5/Permalink
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
« Google is still fighting the earlier case before the Council of State, the highest court in France for cases involving public administration. A person directly involved in the matter said the company is likely to oppose these new fines and go to the French top court again. » 4/Permalink
Mood -1 🙁
-
On aimerait voir un peu plus d'ambition sur les sanctions de la part de la CNIL, au Luxembourg Amazon a été condamné à 746 millions d'€ nextinpact.com/article/47811/rgpd-746-millions-deuros-damende-pour-amazon-au-luxembourg 3/Permalink
❤️ 5 Favorites
Mood 0
-
Comme Google, est-ce qu'ils vont changer leurs pratiques ? Le doute est permis... @pixeldetracking/1377901479588139012 2/Permalink
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
60 millions d'€ pour Facebook, ils doivent malheureusement rigoler 1/ @ElisaBraun/1478824122293620736Permalink
♻️ 4 Retweets
❤️ 6 Favorites
Mood 0
-
Il y a beaucoup de boulot si l'on veut s'attaquer aux pratiques de Google, quelques exemples @pixeldetracking/1386266224263417859?s=20 3/Permalink
❤️ 3 Favorites
Mood 0
-
Rappel : où est le bouton "Tout refuser" ? @pixeldetracking/1377227815205138432 2/Permalink
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood -2 🙁
-
La CNIL réagit enfin. Mais 150 millions d'€ pour Google, c'est de l'argent de poche. Est-ce que Google va changer ses pratiques ? 1/ @PrivacyMatters/1478835913002209284Permalink
♻️ 2 Retweets
❤️ 7 Favorites
Mood 0
-
@alexanderhanff @aeris22 @Cellular_PP Just to be sure, what you are saying also means: 1) a self hosted image ads requires consent cause it’s not strictly necessary. 2) same argument for a contextual ads, served from a 3rd party Regardless of the fact that there is no tracking involved in both cases. Correct?Permalink
Mood +1 🙂
-
@aeris22 @alexanderhanff Thanks! Then @alexanderhanff *storing* the script is not enough per se? Examples: contextual advertising via a script, but without any tracking, or maybe even "google consent mode" if Google is indeed not using the IP address or any other info to track the user)Permalink
Mood +4 🙂
-
@35165_43121 @alexanderhanff And I would have assumed those are not breaking the spirit of ePrivacy 🤷♂️ (but yes, many of the TCF vendors *are* probably breaking this spirit, cause they try to track you via other means)Permalink
Mood +3 🙂
-
@35165_43121 @alexanderhanff Honestly, my understanding from ePrivacy was that it applied if there was an identifier in the mix (hence the "cookies laws" I'm not shocked by Google Consent Mode for example (or any other mechanism where you serve non-personalized ads, without tracking users)Permalink
Mood +4 🙂
-
@35165_43121 @alexanderhanff today server-side is mostly implemented via server-side tagging (from Google for example: pixeldetracking.com/fr/google-tag-manager-server-side-tagging), and you still need to load a JS library and store an identifier on the user browserPermalink
Mood 0
-
@35165_43121 @alexanderhanff But if a script in itself is considered as an information stored on the user's terminal, it's even easier/betterPermalink
Mood +2 🙂
-
@35165_43121 @alexanderhanff It was my understanding. - LI used for the processing of personal data - adtech companies arguing that IP address is not an access, nor a storage, hence no consent needed for purpose X, just LI (from the TCF) I thought that LI wouldn't stand an assessmentPermalink
Mood +1 🙂
-
@35165_43121 @alexanderhanff Thanks for the insights! What was the conclusion from the CNIL? Pixel (or script) in itself considered as an information stored on the user's terminal?Permalink
Mood +2 🙂
-
Permalink
Mood +5 🙂
-
@alexanderhanff Another example from the king of surveillance capitalism (but with good lawyers to argue that they comply with ePrivacy): Consent Mode from Google, where scripts are correctly loaded on the end user terminal (just that there is no cookie) support.google.com/analytics/answer/9976101?hl=enPermalink
Mood +4 🙂
-
@alexanderhanff Sorry to repeat myself, but even if it's technically trivial (and even if I understand your point), I would love to see something written on the topic. "Loading a script" = storage is something that is not understood at all, otherwise DPAs (like the CNIL) would more explicitPermalink
Mood +4 🙂
-
@alexanderhanff Your knowledge would be very useful when I try to argue on this topic with adtech guys ;-) Well, I hope this case against the BBC succeedPermalink
Mood +7 🙂
