4 ms·
I agree with you to a point. When I sign up for a Facebook or LinkedIn type of service and give them a bunch of my personal information, I did that voluntarily
by ams6110 9y ago
I agree with you to a point. When I sign up for a Facebook or LinkedIn type of service and give them a bunch of my personal information, I did that voluntarily and I don't think I should really expect a lot of privacy there. Unless there was an explicit promise otherwise.
Then you have cases like Equifax, where they have a bunch of data about me that I never gave them and they are doing a poor job protecting it. You could argue that I did consent to it as it was probably buried in the terms of credit cards or other credit documents but it's a reasonable expectation in my view that such data would be protected particularly since it includes critical identifying information such as SSN, account numbers, etc.
- r3bl 9y agoWhen I don't sign up for Facebook or LinkedIn, but they do get my data because some user of theirs has my contact info[0], that's when they become pretty much equal to Equifax from an ethical perspective. [0] LinkedIn with its dark pattern of getting access to people's emails and Facebook with its upload of contact lists on older Android devices.
- jimmaswell 9y agoI don't think the likes of Facebook "ghost profiles" are really a big deal. They do provide some benefit to the users of the services.
- r3bl 9y agoIt's data about me being shared with someone I didn't want it to be shared with without my consent. As such, it's a really big deal to me. It's also a really big deal that one can't protect (him|her)self from such data being shared with Facebook. That's why I've compared them with Equifax from a moral standpoint, since the parent comment specifically mentioned Facebook and LinkedIn as an opposition to what Equifax was doing. Whether or not they do provide some benefit to actual Facebook users is completely irrelevant.