gregory house
philosopher-in-chief
if Tata Sky can record the subscriber-channel minutes....rank....Half the channels can be deleted....
Am not sure where I heard about the following, multiple sources I guess.
The UK music chart calculation mechanism was changed to include online sales of songs and the results surprised a lot of people. Some old and very esoteric songs entered the list.
Niche programs have a different target audience. And they always have lower ratings. But their influence can be substantial. The people watching the same generally have more-than-normal powers of persuasion or are what is generally termed as decision makers. If Tata-Sky or similar companies decided to chop off channels just because of low ratings, they might have to bear the consequences. Dropping a few channels might not make a difference. But if they touch the wrong channel, there might just have to regret it. Such decisions are not to be taken without a scientific analysis of viewer data (TAM and aMap claim to provide such data; don't know how reliable that is).
Why is it then that we don't say the same about ISP's & privacy?
Tata-Sky delivers programs to me which I watch. I do not have more than a reasonable choice in that matter. They know what is being provided. Connecting it to who is watching the same and when is an intrusion into privacy which may not be tolerated by many.
On the other hand, ISPs just provide me with a gateway to the internet. They record the fact that I am connected to the net and collect a few details about it (ip, time etc). They don't go about recording what sites I am visiting. Actually, I would be more concerned with services like Google than with details being recorded by my ISP.
We have no qualms letting Google know what we are trying to look for, literally to the point of letting them host personal mail for us as with m$ & yahoo.
The US governement recently (2005) demanded details on web searches from major search engines. Except Google, everybody else gave in. Yahoo has a rather poor history as regards its user's privacy (remember China). But I don't know how long Google can keep denying major governments access to its database of human thinking and actions. Voyeurs would love to get their hands on it. Personally I would like Google to drop the connection between the ip and search at the point of storage rather than after a 18-24 month period. I do not trust the intention of any government when it says that it needs access to information on all people so that it can catch a few.
I am a very recent convert to gmail (waited three years before getting my account) and even now, I don't do anything substantial using it. But as far as search goes, I can't imagine a life without Google. Everybody has a point beyond which they are not comfortable sharing any information. Its is a balance between taking advantage of a service and parting with some information. Where to draw the line is up to the individual.
Am not sure where I heard about the following, multiple sources I guess.
The UK music chart calculation mechanism was changed to include online sales of songs and the results surprised a lot of people. Some old and very esoteric songs entered the list.
Niche programs have a different target audience. And they always have lower ratings. But their influence can be substantial. The people watching the same generally have more-than-normal powers of persuasion or are what is generally termed as decision makers. If Tata-Sky or similar companies decided to chop off channels just because of low ratings, they might have to bear the consequences. Dropping a few channels might not make a difference. But if they touch the wrong channel, there might just have to regret it. Such decisions are not to be taken without a scientific analysis of viewer data (TAM and aMap claim to provide such data; don't know how reliable that is).
Why is it then that we don't say the same about ISP's & privacy?
Tata-Sky delivers programs to me which I watch. I do not have more than a reasonable choice in that matter. They know what is being provided. Connecting it to who is watching the same and when is an intrusion into privacy which may not be tolerated by many.
On the other hand, ISPs just provide me with a gateway to the internet. They record the fact that I am connected to the net and collect a few details about it (ip, time etc). They don't go about recording what sites I am visiting. Actually, I would be more concerned with services like Google than with details being recorded by my ISP.
We have no qualms letting Google know what we are trying to look for, literally to the point of letting them host personal mail for us as with m$ & yahoo.
The US governement recently (2005) demanded details on web searches from major search engines. Except Google, everybody else gave in. Yahoo has a rather poor history as regards its user's privacy (remember China). But I don't know how long Google can keep denying major governments access to its database of human thinking and actions. Voyeurs would love to get their hands on it. Personally I would like Google to drop the connection between the ip and search at the point of storage rather than after a 18-24 month period. I do not trust the intention of any government when it says that it needs access to information on all people so that it can catch a few.
I am a very recent convert to gmail (waited three years before getting my account) and even now, I don't do anything substantial using it. But as far as search goes, I can't imagine a life without Google. Everybody has a point beyond which they are not comfortable sharing any information. Its is a balance between taking advantage of a service and parting with some information. Where to draw the line is up to the individual.
