Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/15/1998 7:23:00 PM
From: David Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32873

If that's all you are going to do with it, it's okay with me. I don't mind logging in, but a userid cookie is pretty non-invasive. I know of numerous others sites that use them, such as Yahoo and WSJ. My qualifier would be that, if you were to ever offer fee based services from this site, that you would do so from either a secure server and/or require manual authentication before proceeding. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious.

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/15/1998 7:28:00 PM
From: Len	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 32873

The easy answer is that anyone walking by your computer could then use your account, posting in your name, and seeing your private messages, if you haven't locked down your system. Why don't you just let everyone know about placing their username and password before the bookmark link, a la http://username:password@talk.techstocks.com, thus mitigating the need to go through the login? That's how mine is set up. Does it present problems I'm not aware of? Len

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/15/1998 7:30:00 PM
From: Cheeky Kid	Respond to of 32873

Have a cookie poll. Log in cookies, maybe but will it grow from there? I have wrote about cookies on this thread the last 2 days, why I hate them. Message 6033018 Message 6021106

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/15/1998 7:35:00 PM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32873

Brad, another thing on cookie login. What if other people are around who have access to your computer and you have "cookies enabled", so now they have access to your account and could post under your name without you knowing. Why have the door always opened??? Keep it locked until the key is inserted!! NO COOKIES, PLEASE.

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/16/1998 12:31:00 AM
From: Josef Svejk	Respond to of 32873

Humbly report, Brad, let me put it as simply as I can. If SI moves to a cookie system, and there is no way to log on without accepting them, I'm outta here. Cheers, Svejk proofsheet.com

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/16/1998 2:20:00 AM
From: peter michaelson	Respond to of 32873

Brad, for myself I don't care one way or the other about cookies. But, SI has always been different and better than other sites - and one special thing is that participants feel they are part of a community and not a commercial target. You might think about giving SI another competitive advantage and a specialness by being cookie-less and proud of it. regards, peter

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/18/1998 2:40:00 AM
From: Apex	Respond to of 32873

Brad: ""...now would be a good time to give an argument as to why we shouldn't."" Thanks for giving us the opportunity to voice an opinion. As far as cookies go: NO THANKS FOR THE COOKIE OFFER, I AM ON A DIET !!!!!!!!!!!!! Cheers, Apex

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/19/1998 10:24:00 AM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32873

Cookies, Netscape Smart Browsing, Data Mining, etc..etc.. The list goes on and on. I wish Brad & Jeff would add to the Silicon Investor Mission Statement, something about free speech, and the on-line privacy, security of their members. Something to the effect that SI will NEVER do anything to participate in data mining, etc... One day Brad & Jeff may seek other opportunities, we need something in effect NOW, so future management cannot take rights away. DO we have any rights, as far as on-line security / privacy? I trust Brad and Jeff, but who knows who will be in charge 5 years from now. If they add it to the mission statement, it will show commitment on their part. Brad & Jeff, I am not trying to be a sh*t disturber. Don't you feel my opinion carries some weight?

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/19/1998 9:23:00 PM
From: Spots	Respond to of 32873

>> We don't need no stinking cookies, etc ... Brad, I routinely refuse cookies (manually), so if SI becomes a cookie monster, like some sites, I'm categorically agin' it. But if it offers an option to those who want it (such as not logging in), then I can tolerate it, provided it means I have to log in (which I'm perfectly willing to do) rather than loose all my profile preferences (which I'm not). To put it succinctly, I routinely delete my cookie files, for a variety of reasons that are probably not appropriate to discuss here. If it's simple to recover from refusing a cookie (login, primarily), I say fine. If more, I say boo, hiss, all 15 of my thumbs down! Serious impact on my use of SI. Although I've expressed this personally (and I only speak for myself), I suspect there is a sizeable, technically aware, security conscious population that agrees, more or less. Of course, I've been wrong before, once or twice <G>. As I've not posted here lately, let me take this moment to express my continuing gratitude for the great job you (and Jeff and Jill) have done in keeping SI up to expectations during the transition. Transition to people of means, I mean <GGG>. Best regards, Spots

To: SI Brad who wrote (2885)	10/22/1998 1:46:00 PM
From: Obewon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 32873

Brad Just thought I'd add my $.02 to the cookie issue. I'd rather not have to deal with cookies since there is so much junk out there thrying to put cookies on my system. I use Explorer and there are several instances where I must accept cookies to access but this requires that I manually reject all I don't want or accept all without comment. It not your problem but a feature that allowed you to keep certain cookies (ie turn on acceptance, get cookie, and then turn off acceptance without deleting the cookie) would be nice. OB