5 ms·

I don't disagree but the attitude in corporate America is simply anything for profit is good and justified. iRobot will happily argue their service will cost m

I don't disagree but the attitude in corporate America is simply anything for profit is good and justified. iRobot will happily argue their service will cost more unless they share your data when what they really mean is you'll have to offset this new revenue stream for them if you want them to stop.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
toomuchtodo 8y ago
So it all comes back to regulation, right? iRobot does this because there is no law against it. AT&T is walking back its selling of location data after the online outrage kicked in, but they'll go back to selling it once everyone has forgotten. Facebook and Google sell your data because there is no law against it. Push your legislator(s) for regulation of your data privacy rights. It is the only way these encroachments on citizen privacy get fixed. Europe does this right (<3 GDPR), and the US has a lot of room for improvement.
- dgzl 8y ago
  edit: lost interest in the battle. /Whiteflag
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - technofiend 8y ago
    I realize you're being sarcastic but customers don't agree to it in any reasonable sense: shrinkwrap agreements are notoriously long winded and obscure and there is usually no way to opt out. iRobot knows if the product actually said "Shares your personal data" on the box it would negativity affect sales. So yes I agree with the person above you who said regulation is the answer. If you make it impossible to share data then it's not longer a revenue stream or a competitive advantage and companies can focus their efforts on improving the product for the consumer to drive profit rather than milking the customer for data and selling it.
  - cronix 8y ago
    So, it's stated clearly on the outside of the box so you can read it and make an informed decision before you purchase it? Or is it hidden inside, in tiny print on a leaflet somewhere for you to discover after you've brought it home and opened it? Or you have to go to the website and hunt for the "revised" version?
amaccuish 8y ago
> you'll have to offset this new revenue stream for them if you want them to stop I find this argument odd. It's like saying I should be penalised because companies can't harvest and sell my organs, since they're being deprived of a "revenue stream". Sure, collecting personal data isn't currently against the law, but the idea that there has to be a compensation for a "potential revenue stream" is ridiculous right?
ardy42 8y ago
> I don't disagree but the attitude in corporate America is simply anything for profit is good and justified. iRobot will happily argue their service will cost more unless they share your data when what they really mean is you'll have to offset this new revenue stream for them if you want them to stop. That argument is becoming less compelling by the day. I used to be pretty libertarian, but now I'm looking forward to the day these companies are slapped with the restrictive regulation that they're totally asking for.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

toomuchtodo 8y ago

So it all comes back to regulation, right? iRobot does this because there is no law against it. AT&T is walking back its selling of location data after the online outrage kicked in, but they'll go back to selling it once everyone has forgotten. Facebook and Google sell your data because there is no law against it. Push your legislator(s) for regulation of your data privacy rights. It is the only way these encroachments on citizen privacy get fixed. Europe does this right (<3 GDPR), and the US has a lot of room for improvement.

dgzl 8y ago
edit: lost interest in the battle. /Whiteflag
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- technofiend 8y ago
  I realize you're being sarcastic but customers don't agree to it in any reasonable sense: shrinkwrap agreements are notoriously long winded and obscure and there is usually no way to opt out. iRobot knows if the product actually said "Shares your personal data" on the box it would negativity affect sales. So yes I agree with the person above you who said regulation is the answer. If you make it impossible to share data then it's not longer a revenue stream or a competitive advantage and companies can focus their efforts on improving the product for the consumer to drive profit rather than milking the customer for data and selling it.
- cronix 8y ago
  So, it's stated clearly on the outside of the box so you can read it and make an informed decision before you purchase it? Or is it hidden inside, in tiny print on a leaflet somewhere for you to discover after you've brought it home and opened it? Or you have to go to the website and hunt for the "revised" version?

amaccuish 8y ago

> you'll have to offset this new revenue stream for them if you want them to stop I find this argument odd. It's like saying I should be penalised because companies can't harvest and sell my organs, since they're being deprived of a "revenue stream". Sure, collecting personal data isn't currently against the law, but the idea that there has to be a compensation for a "potential revenue stream" is ridiculous right?

ardy42 8y ago

> I don't disagree but the attitude in corporate America is simply anything for profit is good and justified. iRobot will happily argue their service will cost more unless they share your data when what they really mean is you'll have to offset this new revenue stream for them if you want them to stop. That argument is becoming less compelling by the day. I used to be pretty libertarian, but now I'm looking forward to the day these companies are slapped with the restrictive regulation that they're totally asking for.