6 ms·

The case of revenge-porn aside, public things are public, and making things public comes with consequences. If you are relying on the current lack of human ing

by daenz 7y ago

The case of revenge-porn aside, public things are public, and making things public comes with consequences. If you are relying on the current lack of human ingenuity in connecting that public data together, you're going to be disappointed.

JohnFen 7y ago
> If you are relying on the current lack of human ingenuity in connecting that public data together, you're going to be disappointed. I'm not saying that you're wrong here. However, the effect that you're describing leads directly to a dystopian world that few people would actually want to be living in, and the only thing that an individual could do about it is to withdraw from society entirely, including never going out in public. There has to be some way of preventing that.
- Joe-Z 7y ago
  No, what he is describing should directly lead to people carefully considering what they share online. I remember 15 years ago everybody knew that, now it's "oh, I get internet points for sharing every bar/restaurant/venue I go to?! let's do that!" (this was in reference to foursquare, apparently they are not a thing anymore?) Not posting your porn online because you're afraid someone will find out surely isn't a dystopian future.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    What he is describing goes far beyond porn sites, or even the online space generally.
  - downrightmike 7y ago
    Foursquare has been licensing their data to Microsoft for millions at a time: https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/04/foursquare-cuts-15m-deal-with-microsoft-to-power-location-and-context-for-windows-and-mobile/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/04/foursquare-cuts-15m-deal-w...
- guuhv 7y ago
  You can't compare "withdraw from society entirely" with "don't star in pornography".
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    True, and I wasn't.
- lopmotr 7y ago
  Acceptable behavior won't need to be hidden and attention-seekers will love everything they do being known. If the behavior really is wrong, then don't do it. If it's not wrong but your society's standards for judging people are wrong, then work to change the society, like what gay people did. Privacy for non-bad behavior is a temporary measure to allow people to practice it until everyone decides that it's not bad. But it also entrenches the societal view that it's bad! In case of behavior that really is bad, then lack of privacy is a good thing because it discourages it and protects other people from the consequences. For example, criminal and credit records. The particular problem the author mentioned was marriage. It's a kind of fraud to fool someone into marrying you by not revealing things that they wouldn't accept about your history no matter how unreasonable their judgement is. You're taking advantage of their ignorance to gain more for yourself at their expense. A potential spouse has every right to dig into any aspect of your past that they want because committing to the wrong partner could ruin their life. It's only a good thing for them to be fully informed.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    > Acceptable behavior won't need to be hidden There is plenty of acceptable behavior that people, quite reasonably, don't want to be tracked or widely known. > The particular problem the author mentioned was marriage. I understand. I was speaking to a larger point, not about this problem in particular.
    - lopmotr 7y ago
      There are useful secrets like business secrets or planning a surprise party. But you have to carefully protect them anyway. What other behaviors are you thinking of that should be protected against easy searching but which are still publicly visible?
      - cardiffspaceman 7y ago
        If you're organizing a lawful protest and in the process, traveling from place to place, how do you avoid triggering a disruption of your protest?
- BubRoss 7y ago
  Whether you want it to happen or not is inconsequential, it's going to happen.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    Only if everyone allows it to.
    - BubRoss 7y ago
      Of anyone can start scraping images and do facial recognition, then they don't need permission.
      - JohnFen 7y ago
        That's not necessarily true. Anyone can copy and distribute movies right now, but you need permission to do it. If you don't have that permission, you're taking the risk of being on the wrong end of legal action. Sure, it's not perfect, but it does have a restraining effect and, more importantly, it provides an avenue for recourse. A similar thing could be done for scraping images and doing face recognition. It only takes the political will.

by daenz 7y ago

JohnFen 7y ago

> If you are relying on the current lack of human ingenuity in connecting that public data together, you're going to be disappointed. I'm not saying that you're wrong here. However, the effect that you're describing leads directly to a dystopian world that few people would actually want to be living in, and the only thing that an individual could do about it is to withdraw from society entirely, including never going out in public. There has to be some way of preventing that.

Joe-Z 7y ago
No, what he is describing should directly lead to people carefully considering what they share online. I remember 15 years ago everybody knew that, now it's "oh, I get internet points for sharing every bar/restaurant/venue I go to?! let's do that!" (this was in reference to foursquare, apparently they are not a thing anymore?) Not posting your porn online because you're afraid someone will find out surely isn't a dystopian future.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  What he is describing goes far beyond porn sites, or even the online space generally.
- downrightmike 7y ago
  Foursquare has been licensing their data to Microsoft for millions at a time: https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/04/foursquare-cuts-15m-deal-with-microsoft-to-power-location-and-context-for-windows-and-mobile/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/04/foursquare-cuts-15m-deal-w...
guuhv 7y ago
You can't compare "withdraw from society entirely" with "don't star in pornography".
- JohnFen 7y ago
  True, and I wasn't.
lopmotr 7y ago
Acceptable behavior won't need to be hidden and attention-seekers will love everything they do being known. If the behavior really is wrong, then don't do it. If it's not wrong but your society's standards for judging people are wrong, then work to change the society, like what gay people did. Privacy for non-bad behavior is a temporary measure to allow people to practice it until everyone decides that it's not bad. But it also entrenches the societal view that it's bad! In case of behavior that really is bad, then lack of privacy is a good thing because it discourages it and protects other people from the consequences. For example, criminal and credit records. The particular problem the author mentioned was marriage. It's a kind of fraud to fool someone into marrying you by not revealing things that they wouldn't accept about your history no matter how unreasonable their judgement is. You're taking advantage of their ignorance to gain more for yourself at their expense. A potential spouse has every right to dig into any aspect of your past that they want because committing to the wrong partner could ruin their life. It's only a good thing for them to be fully informed.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > Acceptable behavior won't need to be hidden There is plenty of acceptable behavior that people, quite reasonably, don't want to be tracked or widely known. > The particular problem the author mentioned was marriage. I understand. I was speaking to a larger point, not about this problem in particular.
  - lopmotr 7y ago
    There are useful secrets like business secrets or planning a surprise party. But you have to carefully protect them anyway. What other behaviors are you thinking of that should be protected against easy searching but which are still publicly visible?
    - cardiffspaceman 7y ago
      If you're organizing a lawful protest and in the process, traveling from place to place, how do you avoid triggering a disruption of your protest?
BubRoss 7y ago
Whether you want it to happen or not is inconsequential, it's going to happen.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  Only if everyone allows it to.
  - BubRoss 7y ago
    Of anyone can start scraping images and do facial recognition, then they don't need permission.
    - JohnFen 7y ago
      That's not necessarily true. Anyone can copy and distribute movies right now, but you need permission to do it. If you don't have that permission, you're taking the risk of being on the wrong end of legal action. Sure, it's not perfect, but it does have a restraining effect and, more importantly, it provides an avenue for recourse. A similar thing could be done for scraping images and doing face recognition. It only takes the political will.