Alltop [0] is great. BlogRank [1] is good too. Look at the sources that bigger news sites get their leads from (the via link at the bottom of articles).
Spend more time than you think necessary writing really great emails for the editors of the smaller blogs. Include a press kit with the stuff they'd need to write a nice looking post: generally a couple photos/large logo and a bullet point description of your pitch and company story.
The problem is that it's hard to judge a company/startup solely based on what they're selling or their "big idea". Execution is a much bigger factor and can be harder to see.
It says on their site that they "Never collect any personally identifiable information without a consumer’s explicit opt in", so what kind of info could they collect with Wifi/Beacon?
First, my original comment was simply meant to point out the feasibility of the practice. The fact that Nomi says they choose not to collect "personally identifiable information" doesn't mean that someone else couldn't (using the same technique) if they wanted to.
But frankly, I don't really trust the term "personally identifiable information" unless it is qualified, because it can mean very different things to different people in different contexts[0]. For example, for one service (I believe the DNS servers) Google claims to "anonymize" IP addresses, but it turns out that they only obscure the last two or three digits, which isn't enough to conceal the identity of the individual.
For another example, you wouldn't believe some of the things that are considered protected health information when dealing with patients (ie, for HIPAA/HITECH compliance)[1].
Even if I trust a company's intentions (which I don't unless given a strong reason otherwise), trusting (a) their ability to understand what information is and isn't sensitive; and (b) guard that information both require a bit more than a vaguely worded assertion on their website.
If you collect information about where a person (or "device") has been over time, that in itself can be an incredibly identifying piece of information - all you need is one other datapoint to "lift the veil", and suddenly you know a lot of sensitive information about a particular individual.
[0] IANAL. "PII" is a legal term, and whether or not certain pieces of information qualify as PII can (and has) been litigated, so the line is ambiguous enough that a simple promise not to collect PII does little to assuage my privacy concerns.
[1] Likewise, you wouldn't believe some of the things that aren't (necessarily) considered PHI.
>Google claims to "anonymize" IP addresses, but it turns out that they only obscure the last two or three digits, which isn't enough to conceal the identity of the individual.
Is there any reason why they wouldn't just hash the IP?
They only need to see it once to extract useful information from the IP itself.
How often you visit the store, where you walk in the store, how long you are at the store.
Your identity doesn't need to be attached for this information to be useful; for example, the store can say things like "gee look half our customers leave three minutes after they enter the store, so we are having a hard time converting walk-ins to sales". Or perhaps "Wow it looks like 90% of our customers come back within a week, we are doing great at getting repeat visits"
PII is generally considered something that is unique and non-public information like a Social Security Number. A broadcast address like a MAC or an IMSI is not private and unless it was combined with a name would not be considered PII.
So as a retailer/third party I could correlate an IMSI/IMEI with an item that was purchased and still be in the clear so long as I do not tie the purchaser's name to it.
Indeed. I was rather shocked to hear a friend had be subpoenaed for a DNA swab based on phone tracking data, along with a handful of other men, in connection with a rape case that happened early in the morning (so few phones in the area). The idea was two-fold a) rule out suspects, and b) (presumably) get in touch with potential witnesses. While everyone wants the guilty party to get caught, I'm unsure what options one would have about refusing such a swab. In theory that swab wouldn't be held on file (but who can know if there is a secret backup of such data -- we don't have adequate oversight in Norway either).
I'm not aware of any legal precedent under which you can refuse to cooperate with an ongoing police investigation, except where such investigation would violate your basic rights (e.g. Bill of Rights in the USA)
In the USA you'd probably have to contend it is either unreasonable search and/or seizure, which would be a difficult case to make.
Edit: Looks like the SCOTUS ruled on DNA testing & the Fourth Amendment just last year.
They can already get your mobile records during a court ordered investigation. That information includes where you were and who you were with. Or rather where your phone was and who your phone was with.
My understanding was that Dogecoin doesn't want to become a "serious" currency and the sentiment in the community against the BTC-community is that they take themselves far too serious.
This decision makes sense if Doge intends to stay the "great comment, I give you 10000 doge for that" fun-currency and drive out everybody whose primary intention is financial gain.
Emulate a demo as much as possible without breaking the guidelines of the Play or App Store. I feel that once I put money into a game once, I should be done. With that being said, it can be hard to make a $10 investment based off of 4 screenshots and a description.
What if you programmed in a different programming language every week or so? Roughly the same result. You'd know a little bit about a lot of languages, but never enough to be very productive, and you'd never build anything worth using.
