3 ms·

I've been reading stuff like that for years. But is there, somewhere, a thorough explanation of how these "stolen" data are actually used against us, how they a

by wiz21c 8y ago

I've been reading stuff like that for years. But is there, somewhere, a thorough explanation of how these "stolen" data are actually used against us, how they are valued, by whom, etc. ? (I didn't look in Google). Not some ideological explanation ('cos we all understand that the data collection induces weakens us against big-corp), but concrete, such as "this advertiser has done this kind of (horror) stuff using that kind of google collected data". I ask 'cos advertising doesn't look that dangerous to many people; it doesn't have the blood of us customers on its hands.

kartan 8y ago
> "this advertiser has done this kind of (horror) stuff using that kind of google collected data" Data collected by Facebook was used to radicalize USA population looking into their political preferences and organizing groups in the extreme of the spectrum. Political ads were used to show lies like "Europe, is negotiating to open borders with Turkey" to people depending on their political orientation during the "Brexit" vote by also Russia. Targetted ads by hostile countries without any electoral supervision are running amok in social networks as ads are private and personalized.
xg15 8y ago
At the moment? I'm not sure there are many examples in the US. However, there is enormous potential for future misuse and, giving the current setup of forces in the ecosystem, it's likely that this potential will be realized. I think you can look at china's social credit system as examples: They use clues from all kinds of collected personal data to assign personalized ratings to people and purposely make their life easier or harder based on those ratings. In the end, the goal is not about collection but about control: Drive people into or away from certain behaviors with unprecedented prevision. The US is less centralized, but I cam easily see a more diffuse version of that emerging there as well. There are many businesses offering personalized scoring already and a large market of customers - you could imagine using it by insurances to adjust your premium (or determine when to cancel a contract), employers to vet candidates, landlords to vet tenants, etc. You don't necessarily need a central authority controlling it. (Slightly OT part follows) Other than that, I think the privacy debate is sometimes a symptom of a deeper problem that, I think, is less talked abou as of now: Direct control. With more and more services - and physical goods - being depended on the cloud, the service providers gain a level of control that is unprecedented. 15 years ago, we all were joking that Windows 98 would secretly talk back to Microsoft - today it's commonly accepted practice that devices, appliactions and OSses constantly send telemetry to their vendors and can at any point change functionality if the vendor says so. We're at a point where, it's normal to run experiments on parts of your user base to optimize retention or learn about the emotional effects of a newsfeed. We can have Elon Musk increase the battery capacity of all Teslas in operation in an instant because he is concerned by a hurricane. Or we can have Amazon removing e-books that had already been purchased from all readers because they have a dispute with the publisher. Not to mention that software and device manufacturers in general can restrict in increasingly precise ways how and to what effect their products may be used. So far, you get occasional public outrage about those things, but their seems to be little legal protection against this. I do hope this will change at some point.
yuhong 8y ago
I did an Ask HN about my essay that did not catch on: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17447280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17447280

by wiz21c 8y ago

kartan 8y ago

> "this advertiser has done this kind of (horror) stuff using that kind of google collected data" Data collected by Facebook was used to radicalize USA population looking into their political preferences and organizing groups in the extreme of the spectrum. Political ads were used to show lies like "Europe, is negotiating to open borders with Turkey" to people depending on their political orientation during the "Brexit" vote by also Russia. Targetted ads by hostile countries without any electoral supervision are running amok in social networks as ads are private and personalized.

xg15 8y ago

At the moment? I'm not sure there are many examples in the US. However, there is enormous potential for future misuse and, giving the current setup of forces in the ecosystem, it's likely that this potential will be realized. I think you can look at china's social credit system as examples: They use clues from all kinds of collected personal data to assign personalized ratings to people and purposely make their life easier or harder based on those ratings. In the end, the goal is not about collection but about control: Drive people into or away from certain behaviors with unprecedented prevision. The US is less centralized, but I cam easily see a more diffuse version of that emerging there as well. There are many businesses offering personalized scoring already and a large market of customers - you could imagine using it by insurances to adjust your premium (or determine when to cancel a contract), employers to vet candidates, landlords to vet tenants, etc. You don't necessarily need a central authority controlling it. (Slightly OT part follows) Other than that, I think the privacy debate is sometimes a symptom of a deeper problem that, I think, is less talked abou as of now: Direct control. With more and more services - and physical goods - being depended on the cloud, the service providers gain a level of control that is unprecedented. 15 years ago, we all were joking that Windows 98 would secretly talk back to Microsoft - today it's commonly accepted practice that devices, appliactions and OSses constantly send telemetry to their vendors and can at any point change functionality if the vendor says so. We're at a point where, it's normal to run experiments on parts of your user base to optimize retention or learn about the emotional effects of a newsfeed. We can have Elon Musk increase the battery capacity of all Teslas in operation in an instant because he is concerned by a hurricane. Or we can have Amazon removing e-books that had already been purchased from all readers because they have a dispute with the publisher. Not to mention that software and device manufacturers in general can restrict in increasingly precise ways how and to what effect their products may be used. So far, you get occasional public outrage about those things, but their seems to be little legal protection against this. I do hope this will change at some point.

yuhong 8y ago

I did an Ask HN about my essay that did not catch on: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17447280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17447280