3 ms·

> I ask Workman why parents should trust him with all that data. “You know, that’s a great question,” he says. “Honestly? Around data, I am not the expert on ho

> I ask Workman why parents should trust him with all that data. “You know, that’s a great question,” he says. “Honestly? Around data, I am not the expert on how and where this is stored.” Apparently, I would have to talk to one of his data guys about that. Is it really asking too much for the CEO to have a legal- and engineering-approved answer to this question? I mean, I’m glad he’s being honest, but it clearly shows that he’s out of touch with his customers if he hasn’t familiarized himself with the basic details of one of consumers’ biggest concerns in this domain.

lostlogin 8y ago
> one of consumers’ biggest concerns in this domain. I hear privacy concerns mentioned by people a lot, but in the non-tech crowd I see nearly zero online behaviour that values privacy. One of us is making incorrect assumptions about user behaviour and privacy wishes. I hope it’s me.
- pacifika 8y ago
  As there is no second equivalent social network that friends and family already use with a strong privacy focus so no wonder that you see no such behaviour. As a hacker news member we are first movers. Privacy concerns become bigger with scale. When we join a service we have a choice and we see no privacy issue. OTOH at the scale when privacy becomes an issue there is no longer a choice. Pair that with the need to grow the user base for investors above all other metrics.
  - lostlogin 8y ago
    > As there is no second equivalent social network that friends and family already use with a strong privacy focus so no wonder that you see no such behaviour. Yesterday afternoon I had a beer with a neighbour and some of his friends while sitting in the sun. ‘Social network’ doesn’t have to mean internet based. Edit: The irony of posting this...
- mhfs 8y ago
  Great point and I’m afraid you are correct. I’ve been trying to evangelize non tech friends/family about privacy in general and the reactions are not great.
- kartan 8y ago
  > One of us is making incorrect assumptions about user behaviour and privacy wishes. I hope it’s me. I heard a lot about people's privacy. Most non-tech people I talk with see Google as a faceless evil corporation that wants to control humanity. But, they use Facebook, and browse the web while logged in in GMail, Facebook, etc. instead of opening a private tab. That is the problem with lack of knowledge. People don't trust big corporations, sometimes to irrational extends. But, they do not understand how the technology really works. If we want behaviour and concern to be one consequence of the other, we need better education and more government action.
  - renholder 8y ago
    >If we want behaviour and concern to be one consequence of the other, we need better education and more government action. I think government action would more align with the realities of better education. The better education aspect, however, relies on people being willing to keep-up with the growth of technology after their compulsory education ends; which is, probably, going to be your hardest sell. For those of us, for whom technology is a an every-day necessity and/or the source of our income, that premise in the interests of continued education in technology seems second nature. However, if you compare that to doctors, they're primary concern is keeping up with medical trends; so, this might be a harder "sell" to them. Instead, much like other professions have governing bodies, technology should probably have it's own. I'm thinking along the lines of things like doctors and medical review boards or lawyers and the BAR. However, there is another caveat that the governments benefit from: Ineptitude around technology is what governments actually benefit from. Telling the governments that they should care more about education around technology and creating laws to protect basic rights is going to be a hard-sell to some of them. Take the current issue with the US law versus the GDPR for a principal example. I don't pretend to have an answer but, to me, it generally comes down to whether the government is far more concerned with the welfare of itself than the welfare of people (in general).
netsharc 8y ago
Smells like a Zuckerberg answer when he was asked if Facebook has shadow profiles (tracking through websites which embed FB elements): "I'm going to have to ask my team and get back to you on that, Senator.". And then he tried rattling some answer about cookies and the Internet (or should I say Twittersphere?) took it as him trying to explain the Internet to some old folks. No, you idiots, he was evading answering the question he knew the answer.

lostlogin 8y ago

> one of consumers’ biggest concerns in this domain. I hear privacy concerns mentioned by people a lot, but in the non-tech crowd I see nearly zero online behaviour that values privacy. One of us is making incorrect assumptions about user behaviour and privacy wishes. I hope it’s me.

pacifika 8y ago
As there is no second equivalent social network that friends and family already use with a strong privacy focus so no wonder that you see no such behaviour. As a hacker news member we are first movers. Privacy concerns become bigger with scale. When we join a service we have a choice and we see no privacy issue. OTOH at the scale when privacy becomes an issue there is no longer a choice. Pair that with the need to grow the user base for investors above all other metrics.
- lostlogin 8y ago
  > As there is no second equivalent social network that friends and family already use with a strong privacy focus so no wonder that you see no such behaviour. Yesterday afternoon I had a beer with a neighbour and some of his friends while sitting in the sun. ‘Social network’ doesn’t have to mean internet based. Edit: The irony of posting this...
mhfs 8y ago
Great point and I’m afraid you are correct. I’ve been trying to evangelize non tech friends/family about privacy in general and the reactions are not great.
kartan 8y ago
> One of us is making incorrect assumptions about user behaviour and privacy wishes. I hope it’s me. I heard a lot about people's privacy. Most non-tech people I talk with see Google as a faceless evil corporation that wants to control humanity. But, they use Facebook, and browse the web while logged in in GMail, Facebook, etc. instead of opening a private tab. That is the problem with lack of knowledge. People don't trust big corporations, sometimes to irrational extends. But, they do not understand how the technology really works. If we want behaviour and concern to be one consequence of the other, we need better education and more government action.
- renholder 8y ago
  >If we want behaviour and concern to be one consequence of the other, we need better education and more government action. I think government action would more align with the realities of better education. The better education aspect, however, relies on people being willing to keep-up with the growth of technology after their compulsory education ends; which is, probably, going to be your hardest sell. For those of us, for whom technology is a an every-day necessity and/or the source of our income, that premise in the interests of continued education in technology seems second nature. However, if you compare that to doctors, they're primary concern is keeping up with medical trends; so, this might be a harder "sell" to them. Instead, much like other professions have governing bodies, technology should probably have it's own. I'm thinking along the lines of things like doctors and medical review boards or lawyers and the BAR. However, there is another caveat that the governments benefit from: Ineptitude around technology is what governments actually benefit from. Telling the governments that they should care more about education around technology and creating laws to protect basic rights is going to be a hard-sell to some of them. Take the current issue with the US law versus the GDPR for a principal example. I don't pretend to have an answer but, to me, it generally comes down to whether the government is far more concerned with the welfare of itself than the welfare of people (in general).

netsharc 8y ago

Smells like a Zuckerberg answer when he was asked if Facebook has shadow profiles (tracking through websites which embed FB elements): "I'm going to have to ask my team and get back to you on that, Senator.". And then he tried rattling some answer about cookies and the Internet (or should I say Twittersphere?) took it as him trying to explain the Internet to some old folks. No, you idiots, he was evading answering the question he knew the answer.