5 ms·

I've commented on their before, but my concern is more with the government having my data than companies. I hate both, but government is worse. Case study China

by mises 8y ago

I've commented on their before, but my concern is more with the government having my data than companies. I hate both, but government is worse. Case study China. Please. I don't care if it's left, right, or center. Next election, support someone who won't turn America into a technologically-enabled police state.

maxxxxx 8y ago
There is a good chance that government and companies will be the same at some point. We should be concerned about any kind of entity having these surveillance powers.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
  > There is a good chance that government and companies will be the same at some point. Naval Ravikant had a good tweet about this: The distant future is small free cities with drone armies and skill-based immigration policies, surrounded by a sea of failed socialist states.[1] Guess which kinds of states have massive surveillance powers? Socialist ones. By definition you need to surveil your entire population in order to keep track of who gets what payment/government dole. How else would you keep track of it? [1]https://twitter.com/naval/status/1084724006626840576?s=21 https://twitter.com/naval/status/1084724006626840576?s=21
  - renholder 8y ago
    > Guess which kinds of states have massive surveillance powers? The United States? Last that I checked, it wasn't the socialist states trying to surveil everyone in the known world, with their own citizens chirping, "You have nothing to fear, if you have nothing to hide."
    - notacoward 8y ago
      Correct. Government surveillance is associated with authoritarianism. The axis between that and democracy is orthogonal to the one between left/communist and right/capitalist. Of the three largest economies, it's the most democratic one that has passed privacy-preserving laws like GDPR while the other two pass surveillance-enabling ones depite being at opposite ends of the left/right spectrum.
      - 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
        Countries in the EU are the most heavily surveilled in the world. Not sure what your point is. GDPR has nothing to do with to government surveillance, it just regulates commerce between private entities that exchange data on the Internet.
devoply 8y ago
Usually candidates that don't support the status quo are labelled loony bin candidates. US is and probably always has been to the extent allowed by tech a technologically-enabled police state. It's just that it usually leaves most of its citizens alone often enough that they can pretend that this is not the case. I mean just see the levels of common harassment by the police while attempting to travel whether on the road or any other mode. It's common, it's routine, and it's banal. It's not the same type of police state as other police states like China or Russia, but it's a type of police state that relies on soft power backed by hard power only when necessary. It's a very sophisticated police state while others are crude police states.
segfaultbuserr 8y ago
> I hate both, but government is worse. And governments have the power to order companies to share their data, e.g. CLOUD Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act), so all personal data collectied by corporations automatically becomes data owned by the governments.
- microcolonel 8y ago
  > And governments have the power to order companies to share their data, e.g. CLOUD Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act), so all personal data collectied by corporations automatically becomes data owned by the governments. Not exactly, the CLOUD Act is an amendment to the Stored Communications Act which removes the stipulation that the data requested in a subpoena or warranted search under the SCA be located in the U.S. The SCA does not authorize mass collection, unless companies are too lazy to limit disclosures to communications content related to the specific person under investigation.
clouddrover 8y ago
> my concern is more with the government having my data than companies If the data exists then companies and governments alike will exploit it regardless of who collected it. Your internet usage, your phone records, even your DNA profile if you used a DNA profiling service can all be accessed at will without your knowledge or consent: https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-retention-laws-by-countries/ https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-retention-laws-by-countrie... In an age when your own data can be weaponized against your best interests I think the only sensible strategy is to minimize your data footprint as much as possible. Do not join "loyalty" programs, do not sign up to surveillance platforms like Facebook, do not submit your DNA to DNA databases, pay in cash whenever possible, etc. You will inevitably be undermined by other people forking over your data to surveillance platforms but you can only do the best you can and hope to persuade as many people as possible to do similarly.
- est31 8y ago
  > Do not join "loyalty" programs, do not sign up to surveillance platforms like Facebook, do not submit your DNA to DNA databases, pay in cash whenever possible, etc. I'm doing most of that already but even if you do all of these things, there's still the "friends" problem. The friends who use one of those apps that upload all of their contacts to the central server. The friends who use facebook. The family members who submit DNA to DNA databases. Very likely your friends are similar to you, so they serve as good predictors for your own data. As is for your family members, they usually have very similar DNA to yours :). E.g. if your friends all live in one certain city, then you likely are to live there as well. If you have a suspiciously high amount of medical doctors in your friend circle, you are most likely one yourself. If 50% of your contacts are LGBT community members, you are likely to be one, too. The data hoarders of this world don't need you to submit your data yourself in order to have your data.
  - gregknicholson 8y ago
    > The data hoarders of this world don't need you to submit your data yourself in order to have your data. It's the vaccination problem (not that one) — if enough people get vaccinated you can prevent a flu outbreak; if they don't, vaccinating yourself will only have limited effectiveness.
kanox 8y ago
Companies that collect your data will sell it, or sell services based on that data. Governments can act like just another customer.

by mises 8y ago

maxxxxx 8y ago

There is a good chance that government and companies will be the same at some point. We should be concerned about any kind of entity having these surveillance powers.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
0x8BADF00D 8y ago
> There is a good chance that government and companies will be the same at some point. Naval Ravikant had a good tweet about this: The distant future is small free cities with drone armies and skill-based immigration policies, surrounded by a sea of failed socialist states.[1] Guess which kinds of states have massive surveillance powers? Socialist ones. By definition you need to surveil your entire population in order to keep track of who gets what payment/government dole. How else would you keep track of it? [1]https://twitter.com/naval/status/1084724006626840576?s=21 https://twitter.com/naval/status/1084724006626840576?s=21
- renholder 8y ago
  > Guess which kinds of states have massive surveillance powers? The United States? Last that I checked, it wasn't the socialist states trying to surveil everyone in the known world, with their own citizens chirping, "You have nothing to fear, if you have nothing to hide."
  - notacoward 8y ago
    Correct. Government surveillance is associated with authoritarianism. The axis between that and democracy is orthogonal to the one between left/communist and right/capitalist. Of the three largest economies, it's the most democratic one that has passed privacy-preserving laws like GDPR while the other two pass surveillance-enabling ones depite being at opposite ends of the left/right spectrum.
    - 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
      Countries in the EU are the most heavily surveilled in the world. Not sure what your point is. GDPR has nothing to do with to government surveillance, it just regulates commerce between private entities that exchange data on the Internet.

devoply 8y ago

Usually candidates that don't support the status quo are labelled loony bin candidates. US is and probably always has been to the extent allowed by tech a technologically-enabled police state. It's just that it usually leaves most of its citizens alone often enough that they can pretend that this is not the case. I mean just see the levels of common harassment by the police while attempting to travel whether on the road or any other mode. It's common, it's routine, and it's banal. It's not the same type of police state as other police states like China or Russia, but it's a type of police state that relies on soft power backed by hard power only when necessary. It's a very sophisticated police state while others are crude police states.

segfaultbuserr 8y ago

> I hate both, but government is worse. And governments have the power to order companies to share their data, e.g. CLOUD Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act), so all personal data collectied by corporations automatically becomes data owned by the governments.

microcolonel 8y ago
> And governments have the power to order companies to share their data, e.g. CLOUD Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act), so all personal data collectied by corporations automatically becomes data owned by the governments. Not exactly, the CLOUD Act is an amendment to the Stored Communications Act which removes the stipulation that the data requested in a subpoena or warranted search under the SCA be located in the U.S. The SCA does not authorize mass collection, unless companies are too lazy to limit disclosures to communications content related to the specific person under investigation.

clouddrover 8y ago

> my concern is more with the government having my data than companies If the data exists then companies and governments alike will exploit it regardless of who collected it. Your internet usage, your phone records, even your DNA profile if you used a DNA profiling service can all be accessed at will without your knowledge or consent: https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-retention-laws-by-countries/ https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-retention-laws-by-countrie... In an age when your own data can be weaponized against your best interests I think the only sensible strategy is to minimize your data footprint as much as possible. Do not join "loyalty" programs, do not sign up to surveillance platforms like Facebook, do not submit your DNA to DNA databases, pay in cash whenever possible, etc. You will inevitably be undermined by other people forking over your data to surveillance platforms but you can only do the best you can and hope to persuade as many people as possible to do similarly.

est31 8y ago
> Do not join "loyalty" programs, do not sign up to surveillance platforms like Facebook, do not submit your DNA to DNA databases, pay in cash whenever possible, etc. I'm doing most of that already but even if you do all of these things, there's still the "friends" problem. The friends who use one of those apps that upload all of their contacts to the central server. The friends who use facebook. The family members who submit DNA to DNA databases. Very likely your friends are similar to you, so they serve as good predictors for your own data. As is for your family members, they usually have very similar DNA to yours :). E.g. if your friends all live in one certain city, then you likely are to live there as well. If you have a suspiciously high amount of medical doctors in your friend circle, you are most likely one yourself. If 50% of your contacts are LGBT community members, you are likely to be one, too. The data hoarders of this world don't need you to submit your data yourself in order to have your data.
- gregknicholson 8y ago
  > The data hoarders of this world don't need you to submit your data yourself in order to have your data. It's the vaccination problem (not that one) — if enough people get vaccinated you can prevent a flu outbreak; if they don't, vaccinating yourself will only have limited effectiveness.

kanox 8y ago

Companies that collect your data will sell it, or sell services based on that data. Governments can act like just another customer.