5 ms·

You can have valid reasons to want to hide legal purchases. Alcohol is a legal drug, but how will you feel when your credit card company sells your purchase his

You can have valid reasons to want to hide legal purchases. Alcohol is a legal drug, but how will you feel when your credit card company sells your purchase history to some analytics firm that deems you high risk for health issues, sells that data to your insurer, and your rates go up? When I go to a bar or a McDonalds I pay cash for this reason.

Thiez 9y ago
> how will you feel when your credit card company sells your purchase history to some analytics firm that deems you high risk for health issues, sells that data to your insurer, and your rates go up? I feel confused that you have this very accurate description of a problem ("companies sell your personal data") and your solution is "we must hide from the companies" instead of "we must enact laws to restrict dealing in personal data".
- greggarious 9y ago
  Do you have any data to support your assertion that policy based measures (versus technical measures) are solution? Facebook used contracts instead of technical controls to protect data, and we've seen how well that worked :) I'll admit many on HN are obsessed with overly technical solutions, but "using cash" seems much simpler than "establish a complex regulatory regime".
  - Thiez 9y ago
    The GDPR seems to have many companies changing their policies and behaviour, and it's not even active yet. So there's that. I'm sure they'll be plenty more data to be gathered on the consequences of those rules the next few years. Technical measures can also be effective, but they usually suffer from the problem that each individual must know about the threat, must know about the technical solution, and must use that solution, which usually requires some effort. I see very few people arguing that health inspectors ("policy") should be abolished and every individual should be responsible for not eating at unhygienic restaurants, even though there are technical solutions one could use that would allow someone to mitigate risks in such a scenario.
- sokoloff 9y ago
  Until/unless we do the latter, it's entirely reasonable to do the former, which an individual can implement on their own immediately.
henrikschroder 9y ago
It's kinda weird that we somehow have to argue for privacy and make up reasons for our purchase history to be private. No. The default is that what I spend my money on is no one else's god damn business. It doesn't matter if I spend it on puppies and charity and unicorn dolls, or if I spend it on dildos and drugs and hookers. And it's incredibly important for society to progress, that everyone can choose to spend their money on things that are illegal, things that are unethical, things that are on the edges, things that are subversive, because economic activity is the best indicator we have of what society values.

Thiez 9y ago

> how will you feel when your credit card company sells your purchase history to some analytics firm that deems you high risk for health issues, sells that data to your insurer, and your rates go up? I feel confused that you have this very accurate description of a problem ("companies sell your personal data") and your solution is "we must hide from the companies" instead of "we must enact laws to restrict dealing in personal data".

greggarious 9y ago
Do you have any data to support your assertion that policy based measures (versus technical measures) are solution? Facebook used contracts instead of technical controls to protect data, and we've seen how well that worked :) I'll admit many on HN are obsessed with overly technical solutions, but "using cash" seems much simpler than "establish a complex regulatory regime".
- Thiez 9y ago
  The GDPR seems to have many companies changing their policies and behaviour, and it's not even active yet. So there's that. I'm sure they'll be plenty more data to be gathered on the consequences of those rules the next few years. Technical measures can also be effective, but they usually suffer from the problem that each individual must know about the threat, must know about the technical solution, and must use that solution, which usually requires some effort. I see very few people arguing that health inspectors ("policy") should be abolished and every individual should be responsible for not eating at unhygienic restaurants, even though there are technical solutions one could use that would allow someone to mitigate risks in such a scenario.
sokoloff 9y ago
Until/unless we do the latter, it's entirely reasonable to do the former, which an individual can implement on their own immediately.

henrikschroder 9y ago

It's kinda weird that we somehow have to argue for privacy and make up reasons for our purchase history to be private. No. The default is that what I spend my money on is no one else's god damn business. It doesn't matter if I spend it on puppies and charity and unicorn dolls, or if I spend it on dildos and drugs and hookers. And it's incredibly important for society to progress, that everyone can choose to spend their money on things that are illegal, things that are unethical, things that are on the edges, things that are subversive, because economic activity is the best indicator we have of what society values.