Lockett, a few of us remember! That was a long time ago, indeed.
IMHO, it's misleading if not disingenuous to phrase the cookie debate - are cookies "dangerous" - because the facts make them sound innocuous. The bottom line is, guns don't kill people, people kill people. No wait, that's a different forum.
In and of themselves, the vast majority of cookies clearly aren't "dangerous"; it was inevitable they'd be required by more and more sites for portal control and navigation. That said, I don't trust anyone, especially those who deal in data aggregations or ad serving. I realize that ad revenue is the backbone of commerce and the engine behind many sites, but dataminers can do powerful things with aggregated data. People lose more than just privacy when they give up rights. IMHO, the slippery slope began when people allowed dealerships to put corporate decals on new car trunks. :-) Democracies have become increasingly corrupt, intrusive, spendthrift because too many give away rights for false promises and free lunches. Companies are merging into monopolies struggling for control of your purse and of selective information dissemination. Greed and power have a way of interfering with triflings like ethics.
Time and again, Yahoo demonstrates a habit of teaming with noxious characters, e.g. Aureate Media. They've allowed advertisers to take control of PC soundcards to blare ads, and they lead the charge to create increasingly distracting obnoxious in-your-face ad banners. Selective advertising based on flawed statistical analysis may mean efficient use of ad dollars to the seller, but it can also manipulate buyers' tastes, attitudes and points of view on many subjects, like social issues and politics. I resist manipulation. I dislike being pigeonholed, although I am pretty powerless to stop it. Not talking about fictional subliminal advertising. Right now, they still rely on brute force... 24/7 eyeball and ear bombardment. However, the psychology used to weave appeal into quack infomercials and spin doctored sound bites is only the tip of the iceberg.
I don't trust sites with OPT OUT policies rather than than the more ethical OPT IN. Privacy policies themselves aren't worth the paper they're printed on, since most every one contains weasel words indemnifying the company and even abrogating in advance their responsibility for stored personal data should they be bought out.
Remember, too, where there are static cookies, there may be active web beacons that actually phone home. Each time you click OK to a software agreement, you may unknowingly be giving it permission to send more and more info back to the hungry maw of datamining servers. Firewalls, web shields and even a Host file can do only so much to thwart the flow. Know thy computer contents, control thy computer contents. Once it's out there, you can't get it back.
Bubby's unofficial cookie FAQ touched briefly on how technologies are gathering and sharing data. That computer in your car may eventually be used against you to void a warranty or jeopardize an accident claim. Your shopping history and medical history might be used against you in some future health insurance dispute. Makes for a very interesting discussion. Sadly, individuals have already lost most their privacy.
Alea iacta est
