3 ms·

Removing regulations on financial institutions also improves economic efficiency. It also results in stuff like say, the 2008 housing collapse, or the failure o

Removing regulations on financial institutions also improves economic efficiency. It also results in stuff like say, the 2008 housing collapse, or the failure of entire countries (see: Greece). Arguing against privacy protection by claiming its for the benefit of our economy is just rehashing the "free market vs regulated market" argument. Sure, economic efficiency improves. Our wellbeing? Not always. Is ad tracking pervasiveness the same as locking factory workers inside a burning building? Probably not. But we learned well from that mistake almost a century ago. We'll learn from this one too.

sjjshvuiajhz 8y ago
These seem like complete non-sequiters, what does ad tracking have to do with mispriced insurance on mortgage-backed securities? How will ad tracking cause the economy to collapse? It seems like you are just bringing up an unrelated traumatic event from the past to scare people. I read that exotic mortgages are making a comeback - maybe congress should focus on that instead of grilling tech CEOs about advertising.
- mileszim 8y ago
  I see where I wasn't clear in addressing your point--I am not trying to equate ad tracking with securities fraud or workplace ethics disasters, I am comparing their role in shaping our current behaviors and perspectives. In general, we didn't foresee the consequences of derivative markets for mortgage backed securities until it was too late, even though some raised concerns. Now we're very well aware, enacting regulations to hopefully prevent it in the future, as well as provide clear channels for recovery and compensation for damages if it does. In general, we didn't foresee the consequence of unregulated treatment for employees until it was too late, even though some raised concerns. Now we're very well aware, enacting regulations to hopefully prevent it in the future, as well as provide clear channels for recovery and compensation for damages if it does. Comparing that to the tracking market today, we have effectively zero regulation and zero ability for recovery and compensation. We know the tracking market is so pervasive that meaningful living/working today requires submitting yourself to this. We also have articles like this one demonstrating clear concerns. The only thing missing is an understanding of the consequences. We can't ever know the scope of the consequences until they've happened. We can however make predictions (both good and bad). It may be just fine, it may not. Should we take steps now to mitigate the possible bad outcomes? Or should we gamble and let the consequences happen to us? The same argument goes for most civic debate. I don't know what a healthy social and regulatory relationship with the tech looks like. I don't believe anyone does yet. I do know that discussing it like we are now improves our understanding of its complexities, and that's always good. Hope this makes sense. Concerning the remark about congress--they're fully capable of addressing both. No reason for an either/or.
  - sjjshvuiajhz 8y ago
    I agree, it’s important to consider the possible harms. When we come up with specific tangible harms, it’s worth writing legislation targeted to address those issues. However, I’d also consider that there is an infite array of possible risks to address, and we are likely to be biased towards looking into the ones that are related to things we are paying the most attention to. Due to the financial success of the tech giants, and specifically the shifting of ad spend from newspapers to tech companies, it seems to me we are likely thinking about the dangers of ad tracking too much, rather than too little. The media companies have unfortunately suffered from the success of tech, so it’s not surprising they would be on guard for problems the industry might cause. And Congress, of course, will use both the carrot and the stick to get their piece of the action in the form of campaign contributions. We have a known-known slow-motion disaster happening right in front of us, that has already seriously damaged world we live on, and is projected to do much worse. That danger is coming from an industry that has had a lot more time to form stronger influence-trading bonds with the powers that be. I feel like we’re all being distracted with a dog-and-pony show when people are walking around scared about ad tracking when the Earth is burning. Maybe if the tech companies can stay at the top of the heap for a long time spending money buying Congress, loyalties will shift enough for the government to be willing to do what’s needed to put the reigns on extractive energy interests and solve humanity’s #1 problem (it pains me to suggest that buying Congress is ever a good thing, but I’m trying to be optimistic in the face of what seems like a huge disaster).

sjjshvuiajhz 8y ago

These seem like complete non-sequiters, what does ad tracking have to do with mispriced insurance on mortgage-backed securities? How will ad tracking cause the economy to collapse? It seems like you are just bringing up an unrelated traumatic event from the past to scare people. I read that exotic mortgages are making a comeback - maybe congress should focus on that instead of grilling tech CEOs about advertising.

mileszim 8y ago
I see where I wasn't clear in addressing your point--I am not trying to equate ad tracking with securities fraud or workplace ethics disasters, I am comparing their role in shaping our current behaviors and perspectives. In general, we didn't foresee the consequences of derivative markets for mortgage backed securities until it was too late, even though some raised concerns. Now we're very well aware, enacting regulations to hopefully prevent it in the future, as well as provide clear channels for recovery and compensation for damages if it does. In general, we didn't foresee the consequence of unregulated treatment for employees until it was too late, even though some raised concerns. Now we're very well aware, enacting regulations to hopefully prevent it in the future, as well as provide clear channels for recovery and compensation for damages if it does. Comparing that to the tracking market today, we have effectively zero regulation and zero ability for recovery and compensation. We know the tracking market is so pervasive that meaningful living/working today requires submitting yourself to this. We also have articles like this one demonstrating clear concerns. The only thing missing is an understanding of the consequences. We can't ever know the scope of the consequences until they've happened. We can however make predictions (both good and bad). It may be just fine, it may not. Should we take steps now to mitigate the possible bad outcomes? Or should we gamble and let the consequences happen to us? The same argument goes for most civic debate. I don't know what a healthy social and regulatory relationship with the tech looks like. I don't believe anyone does yet. I do know that discussing it like we are now improves our understanding of its complexities, and that's always good. Hope this makes sense. Concerning the remark about congress--they're fully capable of addressing both. No reason for an either/or.
- sjjshvuiajhz 8y ago
  I agree, it’s important to consider the possible harms. When we come up with specific tangible harms, it’s worth writing legislation targeted to address those issues. However, I’d also consider that there is an infite array of possible risks to address, and we are likely to be biased towards looking into the ones that are related to things we are paying the most attention to. Due to the financial success of the tech giants, and specifically the shifting of ad spend from newspapers to tech companies, it seems to me we are likely thinking about the dangers of ad tracking too much, rather than too little. The media companies have unfortunately suffered from the success of tech, so it’s not surprising they would be on guard for problems the industry might cause. And Congress, of course, will use both the carrot and the stick to get their piece of the action in the form of campaign contributions. We have a known-known slow-motion disaster happening right in front of us, that has already seriously damaged world we live on, and is projected to do much worse. That danger is coming from an industry that has had a lot more time to form stronger influence-trading bonds with the powers that be. I feel like we’re all being distracted with a dog-and-pony show when people are walking around scared about ad tracking when the Earth is burning. Maybe if the tech companies can stay at the top of the heap for a long time spending money buying Congress, loyalties will shift enough for the government to be willing to do what’s needed to put the reigns on extractive energy interests and solve humanity’s #1 problem (it pains me to suggest that buying Congress is ever a good thing, but I’m trying to be optimistic in the face of what seems like a huge disaster).