2 ms·
I'm not saying that people shouldn't have the choice whether or not to sell their data - I'm saying that even if they have that choice, it doesn't prevent many
by floe 8y ago
I'm not saying that people shouldn't have the choice whether or not to sell their data - I'm saying that even if they have that choice, it doesn't prevent many society-wide harms. (Edit: Which implies that we do need to restrict some uses of large datasets that would cause these harms.)
I'm not sure how you would characterize my position in terms of increasing or decreasing 'control' or 'choice' - I find those terms tricky to apply in this case, so I prefer to apply concrete concepts like 'harm'.
- scarejunba 8y agoHarm is not a concrete concept in your characterization. It's pretty non-concrete and you've demonstrated no manner in which it occurs under the circumstance, only the possibility of it occurring. If my friends and I all decide to self-insure as a group and we will pool our money to do so and we all agree to be covered by our collective-owned policy only so long as we submit our data in to the group, I want that to be permissible. This is us choosing to interact with each other as a freely-associating group. That's our business. I don't want it restricted because I have lots of friends. And I'm sick of people continually taking away my right to use my data with other people who choose to use their data. There is a societal cost to not allowing freedom. I'm not game for some Communist-style Committee for Personal Use of Personal Data Voluntarily Given. Yes, CoPUPeDVoG is not okay.
- icebraining 8y agoIf we need to restrict, that means we need to take away some choice. It's a straight implication. I don't mean that pejoratively, I'm generally in favor of the idea.