I left this as a comment on their blog which I assume will never be approved:
"We fundamentally believe that the online
experience is better when it is personalized"
Um, doing so is not impeded by DNT as that does not relate to ads. That a bit of a white-lie to imply that it is they way you've worded that first paragraph.
"It basically means that the DNT signal
from IE10 doesn’t express user intent."
Actually I think it does - you think your average person on the street wants targeted ads? Seriously - who is writing this.
"In principle, we support “Do Not Track” (DNT)"
In principle China, Syria, Iran etc support Human Rights...
"Ultimately, we believe that DNT must map to
user intent — not to the intent of one
browser creator, plug-in writer, or third-
party software service."
Again - seriously - what reality are you apart of?
I had hoped for a Yahoo turn-around of sorts, I really did. You've lost me.
Both side are playing an Orwellian game, pretending they are concerned with users intentions & desires when in reality both are assuming that users have no intents and desires coherent enough to act on.
They are fighting over the default because they know that in 95% of cases, the default is all that matters.
How are ads not part of the online experience? (At least for everyone not using Adblock). Of course they are. Hell, many click on them!
Actually I think it does - you think your average person on the street wants targeted ads?
It depends. If the alternative is paying or not having the content, absolutely. In my limited experience, people don't really care or mind being tracked unless they can see the drawbacks in their face.
I had hoped for a Yahoo turn-around of sorts, I really did. You've lost me.