I apologize in advance that this will probably end up looking a bit like a rant.

I'm sorry, but what is the deal with web-based tracking? I see comments like

> Whenever you visit a website with an ad, DoubleClick knows you looked at that article, and uses that to build a profile about your preferences. I don't think when your average joe reads an article that it is fair that their preferences are being tracked in this way.

and I honestly wonder how this sentiment can be so common, given the realities of our current society (note: this comment is not meant to say anything bad about that comment's author, it's just a convenient example of a trend in the discourse on this topic).

First, we give up many "rights" as tradeoffs for other things that we want. We have the right to the pay from our jobs, but that doesn't mean that we are entitled to get things from the store for free. We have to give up ownership rights of our money in order to trade it for goods and services. We have the right to free speech, but that doesn't mean that someone can't ask us to leave their home or other property if we say something that upsets them. We give up our right to say whatever we want by going onto someone else's property. This sort of situation is so common that it would be impossible for me to list all of the times in which we are faced with it here. However, this argument would not be complete unless I also stated that web-based tracking is in exactly this category: someone has set up a situation where your computer can exchange data with their server. However, in doing so, it is possible that they will notice that you have done so and keep a record of this fact. In other words, if you, through your computer, communicate with a company or individual, that company or individual may know that you communicated with them and what the contents of those communications were. You are giving up your right not to be known to have performed a behavior by a set of potential witnesses in exchange for performing that behavior in front of those witnesses. It's unreasonable to say that, just because you are communicating through computerized agents the other party should not be able to keep a record of your exchange.

Second, it is unfathomable (edit: To me. Please, tell me how your opinion differs) that this could be an issue for people because this is the state in which we constantly live. Every time you leave your house, your neighbors may take notice. Every time you go to the store, your actions are recorded (tracked!) by security cameras. The clerk knows what you bought and may recognize you as a regular customer. If you use a credit or loyalty card, the store keeps keeps a log (tracks) your purchases and builds a demographic profile. At a casino, the floor manager watches you gamble over security cameras. If they notice you winning a lot, they may ask you to leave for the day. I could go on like this all day. The point is that there are all kinds of times where we are tracked and where the only way to opt out is not to have dealings with the tracking entity or to not go out in public. There are all kinds of businesses built around or supplemented by tracking people. It seems to me that the tracking-things-you-witness ship has already sailed and if people wish to bring it back into harbor, they will first need to establish a reasonable test that makes it clear when tracking is actually abusive. It seems very unlikely to me that any test that wasn't specifically designed to do so would label all internet-based tracking as abusive, as some people seem to do, while calling these other behaviors OK.

Am I wrong? Am I just an asshole?