5 ms·
It would make entire classes of dangerous but also potentially useful companies illegal. The same way that we don't currently get to experience all the potentia
by quadrangle 8y ago
It would make entire classes of dangerous but also potentially useful companies illegal. The same way that we don't currently get to experience all the potential that is blocked because of privacy rules around medical records.
At the very least, there's been no societal consensus that we want the trade-offs that come from allowing every click, view, email, and contact to be scanned and used for profit in whatever ways companies want. It happened by pure assertion: the companies just did it and did all they could to avoid even letting people actually know so they wouldn't have to ask.
Maybe we overall would rather lose all the benefits in order to block the harms and dangers.
- quadrangle 8y agoaddendum: note that by "lose the benefits…" etc. I mean at a social level. It's very distinct to just not have certain businesses exist compared to the self-sacrifice of opting-out personally but still living in a world with these things otherwise. I'd much rather have the status quo (and stronger) around privacy regulations for medical records than live in a world without that but then be one of a few people who forgo use of common medical facilitaties over personal privacy objections.