4 ms·

Consumer perception of what is and isn’t “creepy” has somewhat shifted in light of recent issues, however. Many of the businesses to which this law would apply

by ovao 8y ago

Consumer perception of what is and isn’t “creepy” has somewhat shifted in light of recent issues, however. Many of the businesses to which this law would apply have established their business models in a time when privacy may have been less in the front of a consumer’s mind. Businesses just starting out have an easier time knowing which lines not to cross in their business models than those who began their journies sometimes over a decade ago.

Silhouette 8y ago
I think a lot of people have always considered some of the practices employed in the tech sector to be creepy and unwelcome. It's just that awareness has increased, and now there's a sense that you don't just have to put up with the intrusions and abuses to live a normal life any more.
- cromwellian 8y ago
  You have the choice not to use the major tech companies. In fact, a favorite pastime of HN is recommending all of the alternatives to use. Another example, you don't have to buy an Amazon Echo or Google Assistant. If you find cloud connected microphones in your home creepy, don't do it. Why is that not sufficient? Or do the people who are creeped out want to make the choice for other people and remove products from the market they'd like to use?
  - Silhouette 8y ago
    You have the choice not to use the major tech companies. Sure, but it is increasingly the case that by doing so you are excluded from normal daily activities, because in some cases these technologies are now how our society communicates. For example, you can no longer park legally in many UK streets or public car parks without using a smartphone app, which means working with Apple or Google (Android) technology for the device, and working with a mobile network operator for the data connection. In theory, you can usually call or text from a feature phone instead, which means you only have to deal with the mobile network, but typically those facilities are among the worst user experience you will ever encounter, and taking upwards of 15 minutes to make a simple payment is not unusual, if you can even pay successfully at all. You no longer have any option to pay quickly, reliably and anonymously in cash the way we used to.
    - cromwellian 8y ago
      In situations where you have no choice, I agree. This has long been an issue with credit card payments too. But IMHO, the government could fix this by simply having their own payment mechanism. I mean, every store has their own rewards card, why can I just buy a parking card for the whole city that I top-off once in a while and just at the meters?
      - Silhouette 8y ago
        But IMHO, the government could fix this by simply having their own payment mechanism. Honestly not sure if you're joking here... The government in my country has a somewhat well-established payment mechanism, which relies on small metallic or paper-plastic tokens to represent value, and that is what we used to pay for parking until these new-fangled things came along.
        cromwellian 8y ago
        I'm not joking, physical coins and tokens are irritating and inconvenient to carry. Cash has other portability annoyances. A cash card that can be refilled electronically is more convenient than having to hit ATMs constantly or deal with merchants having exact change. If you tell me to give up credit cards or mobile payments, I won't. I'd rather credit cards and mobile payments be made secure and private, but in the worse case, I'll trade convenience for marginal loss of privacy, since in decades of walking this earth, I've yet to have been harmed by it. I'd be more concerned if I lived in a country with a more fascist authoritarian government, but the cost/benefit tradeoff for me, personally, it well worth it. Other people have the choice of not doing so, they just have to suffer the irritation of cash and loss of convenience.
        Silhouette 8y ago
        Well, that's fair enough, if you're choosing to accept that trade-off. My concern here is that often it is no longer a meaningful choice, and everyone else is being forced to accept the same trade-off whether they favour their privacy and security or not. In that particular case, with a simple payment card or the like, perhaps it's not such a big deal. However, when something like your phone, your home or your car is compromised, the potential harm is more significant.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Barrin92 8y ago
>Many of the businesses to which this law would apply have established their business models in a time when privacy may have been less in the front of a consumer’s mind. I think the degree to which your business model is future proof in the face of changing preferences of consumers should be on the mind on entrepreneurs, and if it isn't I think it's a good thing that new companies will eventually supplant them. Not different at all from companies that had their eye on increasing environmental standards and planned accordingly.
- ovao 8y ago
  I agree that we're somewhat overdue for a shakeup, although I'm not entirely sure any companies founded 10+ years ago could have anticipated the changing of the tide with respect to consumer privacy. I think the larger companies (notably Facebook) are learning as they go. And, frankly, doing a fairly good job of that. An example is Facebook's reaction to racial profiling in the real estate and renters market. In my opinion, they handled that as well as could be reasonably expected.

by ovao 8y ago

Silhouette 8y ago

I think a lot of people have always considered some of the practices employed in the tech sector to be creepy and unwelcome. It's just that awareness has increased, and now there's a sense that you don't just have to put up with the intrusions and abuses to live a normal life any more.

cromwellian 8y ago
You have the choice not to use the major tech companies. In fact, a favorite pastime of HN is recommending all of the alternatives to use. Another example, you don't have to buy an Amazon Echo or Google Assistant. If you find cloud connected microphones in your home creepy, don't do it. Why is that not sufficient? Or do the people who are creeped out want to make the choice for other people and remove products from the market they'd like to use?
- Silhouette 8y ago
  You have the choice not to use the major tech companies. Sure, but it is increasingly the case that by doing so you are excluded from normal daily activities, because in some cases these technologies are now how our society communicates. For example, you can no longer park legally in many UK streets or public car parks without using a smartphone app, which means working with Apple or Google (Android) technology for the device, and working with a mobile network operator for the data connection. In theory, you can usually call or text from a feature phone instead, which means you only have to deal with the mobile network, but typically those facilities are among the worst user experience you will ever encounter, and taking upwards of 15 minutes to make a simple payment is not unusual, if you can even pay successfully at all. You no longer have any option to pay quickly, reliably and anonymously in cash the way we used to.
  - cromwellian 8y ago
    In situations where you have no choice, I agree. This has long been an issue with credit card payments too. But IMHO, the government could fix this by simply having their own payment mechanism. I mean, every store has their own rewards card, why can I just buy a parking card for the whole city that I top-off once in a while and just at the meters?
    - Silhouette 8y ago
      But IMHO, the government could fix this by simply having their own payment mechanism. Honestly not sure if you're joking here... The government in my country has a somewhat well-established payment mechanism, which relies on small metallic or paper-plastic tokens to represent value, and that is what we used to pay for parking until these new-fangled things came along.
      - cromwellian 8y ago
        I'm not joking, physical coins and tokens are irritating and inconvenient to carry. Cash has other portability annoyances. A cash card that can be refilled electronically is more convenient than having to hit ATMs constantly or deal with merchants having exact change. If you tell me to give up credit cards or mobile payments, I won't. I'd rather credit cards and mobile payments be made secure and private, but in the worse case, I'll trade convenience for marginal loss of privacy, since in decades of walking this earth, I've yet to have been harmed by it. I'd be more concerned if I lived in a country with a more fascist authoritarian government, but the cost/benefit tradeoff for me, personally, it well worth it. Other people have the choice of not doing so, they just have to suffer the irritation of cash and loss of convenience.
        Silhouette 8y ago
        Well, that's fair enough, if you're choosing to accept that trade-off. My concern here is that often it is no longer a meaningful choice, and everyone else is being forced to accept the same trade-off whether they favour their privacy and security or not. In that particular case, with a simple payment card or the like, perhaps it's not such a big deal. However, when something like your phone, your home or your car is compromised, the potential harm is more significant.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Barrin92 8y ago

>Many of the businesses to which this law would apply have established their business models in a time when privacy may have been less in the front of a consumer’s mind. I think the degree to which your business model is future proof in the face of changing preferences of consumers should be on the mind on entrepreneurs, and if it isn't I think it's a good thing that new companies will eventually supplant them. Not different at all from companies that had their eye on increasing environmental standards and planned accordingly.

ovao 8y ago
I agree that we're somewhat overdue for a shakeup, although I'm not entirely sure any companies founded 10+ years ago could have anticipated the changing of the tide with respect to consumer privacy. I think the larger companies (notably Facebook) are learning as they go. And, frankly, doing a fairly good job of that. An example is Facebook's reaction to racial profiling in the real estate and renters market. In my opinion, they handled that as well as could be reasonably expected.