3 ms·

You seem to be arguing as though the current situation is preferable and consumers just need to be convinced of that. Firstly, the user is not in control of th

You seem to be arguing as though the current situation is preferable and consumers just need to be convinced of that. Firstly, the user is not in control of the contract. They have no realistic means of modification or exerting pressure, nor resisting or requiring changes. Take it or leave it is not control. Secondly. You are likely aware of the permissions systems being introduced on modern smartphones. This is an interesting step towards inverting the control of the device back towards the user. Similar steps can be made in other areas. CNN training is certainly a different action to usage, and has different privacy implications, so they should obtain permissions independently. Note how these systems are not permission forever, but permission for now. Handling this sort of data access is a pain, but it isn't actually hard.

AndrewKemendo 10y ago
You seem to be arguing as though the current situation is preferable and consumers just need to be convinced of that. My whole stance is that it's unknown if it's preferable because people don't know what the long term costs are - as no one has told them about it. Clearly they are gaining value from utilizing these systems or they wouldn't be using them. What isn't understood is if they would still use them if they understood the potential long range privacy implications. Firstly, the user is not in control of the contract. They have no realistic means of modification or exerting pressure, nor resisting or requiring changes. Take it or leave it is not control. In the case of private services, it most certainly is control. Irrespective of that however, these systems aren't basic services or things that people have a right to, so your control argument is in the wrong context. Facebook et al. are frivolities - not needs.

3 ms·

You seem to be arguing as though the current situation is preferable and consumers just need to be convinced of that. Firstly, the user is not in control of th

by Normal_gaussian 10y ago

AndrewKemendo 10y ago
You seem to be arguing as though the current situation is preferable and consumers just need to be convinced of that. My whole stance is that it's unknown if it's preferable because people don't know what the long term costs are - as no one has told them about it. Clearly they are gaining value from utilizing these systems or they wouldn't be using them. What isn't understood is if they would still use them if they understood the potential long range privacy implications. Firstly, the user is not in control of the contract. They have no realistic means of modification or exerting pressure, nor resisting or requiring changes. Take it or leave it is not control. In the case of private services, it most certainly is control. Irrespective of that however, these systems aren't basic services or things that people have a right to, so your control argument is in the wrong context. Facebook et al. are frivolities - not needs.