Common sense isn't.
I respect your privacy, but can't do much about protecting it, other than my small part.
As for the Google logo, their standard setup uses a link to a logo file on Google's server. The same is true for some other logos. (Whether intentionally or not) This way they log a file request, including Referer page, every time someone views a page with their logo on it. This way they can track activity of many sites other than their own. I store logos locally, or don't use logos at all, and change the links, to avoid that tracking. Of course if you actually use the Google search, or follow my off-site links, then they will follow your comings and goings at their sites (a small price for searching, etc.). I initially signed up for Google's affiliate program to get a penny per search, but I decided the obligation to cooperate with their (potential) tracking was not worth it. I decided to go with the free search link with the logo modification described above.
I signed up for Amazon referral links, but those only track you if you follow them (like any other off-site links).
I have no intention of ever sharing any collected information with anyone for anything. I also have no intention of ever sending unsolicited mass email (spam) to anyone about anything. That said, I have no control over several things, which could possibly affect your privacy. My logs are controlled by, protected by, and available to my web host's company. I think they'll protect the information, but it's beyond my control.
If you care about your privacy, it's up to you to find and use an anonymizer or a proxy server, or other means. Freedom.net is no more, but its precedent lives on in TOR and the Anonymity bibliography. Useful Addons for Firefox include too many to keep up with, but EFF usually recommends or has some good ones, and there's a search for whatever you want/need.
You could also try one of many VPN services. Here's a rating site (no endorsement).
As they say, use at your own risk.
|Quote of the moment|
|[I]t [is] indispensable that some provision should be made for defending the Community agst [against] the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief Magistrate. The limitation of the period of his service was not a sufficient security. He might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers. . . In the case of the Executive Magistracy, which was to be administered by a single man, loss of capacity or corruption, was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic.|
|~ Constitutional Convention, July 20, 1787 (James Madison, 1900-1910, IV, pages 15-16) ~|
Common sense isn't.
Images stored locally for protection of your privacy (unless/until you search with Google). Stomp out web bugs (archive.org).
Copyright © 2000- hal9000[zat]mensetmanus.netI last touched this page on Friday, 2007-11-23 at 11:42:52 UTC.