4 ms·

The problem is that people who understand the value of privacy are probably less than 1% of the total population. The rest don't understand or don't care and th

The problem is that people who understand the value of privacy are probably less than 1% of the total population. The rest don't understand or don't care and they are the target consumers of the said corporations. So simply logging out of Facebook or start buying Apple products yourself is not enough anymore. For the same reason I can't buy your prediction about next big successful companies, even if I would like to.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
> The problem is that people who understand the value of privacy are probably less than 1% of the total population. This is more than enough people to encourage public policy makers to make appropriate policy decisions, and failing that, run for office. Are you a squeaky wheel? If not, make yourself one.
- esalman 8y ago
  It's funny because just this morning I came across and read through an article on how hard it has become for progressive minded people to run for, let alone actually get to the office. Here's the link if anyone is interested: http://idlewords.com/2018/10/portrait_of_a_campaign.htm http://idlewords.com/2018/10/portrait_of_a_campaign.htm Sorry if it sounds offensive, but I feel that we (hacker news crowd) really overestimate ourselves. Each one of our votes has the same weight as the rest of the population.
  - mikeleeorg 8y ago
    That's a very sobering article.
    - esalman 8y ago
      Isn't it? It's sad that this wave of nationalist and right-wing mentality is taking over the world, Brazil being the latest example. My worst fear is that someone like, or worse, than Hitler will have to come along until this trend reverses itself.
      - cronix 8y ago
        And think of what someone who was Hitler-like could do with all of this data that we send these companies (and governments). Just take one example of "rounding up homosexuals"... it couldn't be easier to find out who they are in today's world. Someone knows the products they buy, the type of porn they watch (if they do), the "friends" they communicate with (and what was said), the places they visit or have visited in the past and a myriad of other things all time and date stamped. We just need to look at how China is integrating this type of data into the tech the gov't and police forces are using, ie "social credit system." The data already exists... it's just a matter of how it's used. Seriously, imagine what more Hitler could have/would have done if the Nazis had access to the type of data that is "freely" available today... This data doesn't go away. It can be used at anytime in the future, when "views" change. What's ok now, might not be at some point later on. Let your mind wander a little. Think. We are basically inputting every detail of our lives into "evidence." This isn't a right wing/left wing thing. Socialists would love to make sure you're "in-line" with the party as much as a Nazi would. Again, look at what China is currently doing. Times change, and with that so do the beliefs and morals. What I fear most is how our current data will be used by these future "regimes", however you want to label them. Soon, all of this data will be more about control than it currently is. We're debating stupid annoying ads. Think of the other more serious ramifications with this data in the "wrong hands."
  - codyb 8y ago
    For the most parts our votes count for less because we live in states like NY and CA which get two senators despite staggeringly larger populations than the vast majority of states. This also means in Presidential elections our votes count less as well.
fx32s 8y ago
I feel the common rhetoric here is to dictate people what's ok and what's not under the assumption they don't understand. Many people (including myself) are fine with the price we pay for free online services and understand the downsides. I really don't mind companies trying to show me more relevant ads by tracking and analyzing what I interact with in return for most of the products I use being free. Obviously a large group of people does either not understand the implications or does not think they are worth the services but I think it's wrong to assume you know what's best for every user.
- esalman 8y ago
  I agree with you on that we shouldn't assume that we know what's best for every user. But how big corporations behave is driven by greed more than anything else. Companies like Google and Facebook are becoming more greedy for data by the day and have started to cross ethical boundaries. And personally, I think greed is not good for anybody.
- fermienrico 8y ago
  Would you be ok with trading off your medical history for example? What about insurance companies providing you a quote based on your online habits? Browsing car modification forums and then all of a sudden your car insurance goes up. What about location based privacy? What about government powers being able to exploit existing advertisement data infrastructure for law enforcement purposes? Sure, seeing a new camera ad on instagram is harmless but the overreaching possibilities of sacrificing privacy are deep, profound for the society. There are so many aspects, I've just put forth a few above.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
  So, would you be OK then with making it illegal to share any information about people who themselves didn't consent on those "free" platforms? You cannot upload pictures and you cannot mention them?
- dgudkov 8y ago
  >....and understand the downsides. I believe very few people (if any) actually understand the downsides of having a vast amount of personal data aggregated on every user. All the assumptions below are false: * I know exactly what information on me is given to 3rd parties by online services. * The 3rd parties can provide 100% guarantee that my personal information will remain secure and won't be stolen by hackers or unlawfully traded by an employee. * Even if it gets stolen, there is no way my personal information can be used for identity theft or socially engineered account takeover. * There is no way private aspects of my life (browsing history, online purchases, direct messages, etc.) can become publicly available.
Aunche 8y ago
> people who understand the value of privacy are probably less than 1% of the total population Am I so out of touch? No it must be 99% of people who are wrong. What exactly is the value of privacy besides the satisfaction that big tech companies aren't making as much money from me?
- esalman 8y ago
  > What exactly is the value of privacy besides the satisfaction that big tech companies aren't making as much money from me? How about knowing that someone is not being deported from a port of entry based on what they posted on Facebook 6 months ago?
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
  > Am I so out of touch? Yes. > What exactly is the value of privacy besides the satisfaction that big tech companies aren't making as much money from me? 1. Where does that money that they are making come from? 2. The value of privacy is that without it there is no personal autonomy. Without privacy, you lose all power over your life.

toomuchtodo 8y ago

> The problem is that people who understand the value of privacy are probably less than 1% of the total population. This is more than enough people to encourage public policy makers to make appropriate policy decisions, and failing that, run for office. Are you a squeaky wheel? If not, make yourself one.

esalman 8y ago
It's funny because just this morning I came across and read through an article on how hard it has become for progressive minded people to run for, let alone actually get to the office. Here's the link if anyone is interested: http://idlewords.com/2018/10/portrait_of_a_campaign.htm http://idlewords.com/2018/10/portrait_of_a_campaign.htm Sorry if it sounds offensive, but I feel that we (hacker news crowd) really overestimate ourselves. Each one of our votes has the same weight as the rest of the population.
- mikeleeorg 8y ago
  That's a very sobering article.
  - esalman 8y ago
    Isn't it? It's sad that this wave of nationalist and right-wing mentality is taking over the world, Brazil being the latest example. My worst fear is that someone like, or worse, than Hitler will have to come along until this trend reverses itself.
    - cronix 8y ago
      And think of what someone who was Hitler-like could do with all of this data that we send these companies (and governments). Just take one example of "rounding up homosexuals"... it couldn't be easier to find out who they are in today's world. Someone knows the products they buy, the type of porn they watch (if they do), the "friends" they communicate with (and what was said), the places they visit or have visited in the past and a myriad of other things all time and date stamped. We just need to look at how China is integrating this type of data into the tech the gov't and police forces are using, ie "social credit system." The data already exists... it's just a matter of how it's used. Seriously, imagine what more Hitler could have/would have done if the Nazis had access to the type of data that is "freely" available today... This data doesn't go away. It can be used at anytime in the future, when "views" change. What's ok now, might not be at some point later on. Let your mind wander a little. Think. We are basically inputting every detail of our lives into "evidence." This isn't a right wing/left wing thing. Socialists would love to make sure you're "in-line" with the party as much as a Nazi would. Again, look at what China is currently doing. Times change, and with that so do the beliefs and morals. What I fear most is how our current data will be used by these future "regimes", however you want to label them. Soon, all of this data will be more about control than it currently is. We're debating stupid annoying ads. Think of the other more serious ramifications with this data in the "wrong hands."
- codyb 8y ago
  For the most parts our votes count for less because we live in states like NY and CA which get two senators despite staggeringly larger populations than the vast majority of states. This also means in Presidential elections our votes count less as well.

fx32s 8y ago

I feel the common rhetoric here is to dictate people what's ok and what's not under the assumption they don't understand. Many people (including myself) are fine with the price we pay for free online services and understand the downsides. I really don't mind companies trying to show me more relevant ads by tracking and analyzing what I interact with in return for most of the products I use being free. Obviously a large group of people does either not understand the implications or does not think they are worth the services but I think it's wrong to assume you know what's best for every user.

esalman 8y ago
I agree with you on that we shouldn't assume that we know what's best for every user. But how big corporations behave is driven by greed more than anything else. Companies like Google and Facebook are becoming more greedy for data by the day and have started to cross ethical boundaries. And personally, I think greed is not good for anybody.
fermienrico 8y ago
Would you be ok with trading off your medical history for example? What about insurance companies providing you a quote based on your online habits? Browsing car modification forums and then all of a sudden your car insurance goes up. What about location based privacy? What about government powers being able to exploit existing advertisement data infrastructure for law enforcement purposes? Sure, seeing a new camera ad on instagram is harmless but the overreaching possibilities of sacrificing privacy are deep, profound for the society. There are so many aspects, I've just put forth a few above.
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
So, would you be OK then with making it illegal to share any information about people who themselves didn't consent on those "free" platforms? You cannot upload pictures and you cannot mention them?
dgudkov 8y ago
>....and understand the downsides. I believe very few people (if any) actually understand the downsides of having a vast amount of personal data aggregated on every user. All the assumptions below are false: * I know exactly what information on me is given to 3rd parties by online services. * The 3rd parties can provide 100% guarantee that my personal information will remain secure and won't be stolen by hackers or unlawfully traded by an employee. * Even if it gets stolen, there is no way my personal information can be used for identity theft or socially engineered account takeover. * There is no way private aspects of my life (browsing history, online purchases, direct messages, etc.) can become publicly available.

Aunche 8y ago

> people who understand the value of privacy are probably less than 1% of the total population Am I so out of touch? No it must be 99% of people who are wrong. What exactly is the value of privacy besides the satisfaction that big tech companies aren't making as much money from me?

esalman 8y ago
> What exactly is the value of privacy besides the satisfaction that big tech companies aren't making as much money from me? How about knowing that someone is not being deported from a port of entry based on what they posted on Facebook 6 months ago?
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
> Am I so out of touch? Yes. > What exactly is the value of privacy besides the satisfaction that big tech companies aren't making as much money from me? 1. Where does that money that they are making come from? 2. The value of privacy is that without it there is no personal autonomy. Without privacy, you lose all power over your life.