2 ms·

Ads? I'd assume you'd be completely against this, but collecting a whole bunch of voting preferences would probably be incredibly valuable to someone. Just giv

Ads? I'd assume you'd be completely against this, but collecting a whole bunch of voting preferences would probably be incredibly valuable to someone. Just give proper notice.

godelski 7y ago
Doesn't that also potentially undermine democracy? Ads are specifically intended to sway peoples thinking. I know this already happens with politics but do we really need more tools to influence people? (Yes we can do it for good, but there's equal potential for bad) I'm not saying we should, but I'm saying we should think about this before that kind of data is mass gathered and sold.
- jedimastert 7y ago
  > Doesn't that also potentially undermine democracy? I don't know about that. It's true that ads are meant to sway thoughts, but aren't debates basically supposed to do the same thing? The problem would be misinformation. The information shod definitely be use carefully and thoughtfully, I agree. Or possibly even not collected at all, if at all possible. I was just pointing out one avenue of monetization.
  - godelski 7y ago
    I think the difference with debates is that they are moderated and usually fact checked. Ads on the other hand are much more prolific and it would be substantially harder to fact check everything. But the ads isn't my concern, my concern is the data. You could use the data for good. It could help politicians and candidates find out what constituents want to a high accuracy. This would clearly be a good thing. The issue is how that data is handled. If that data becomes public (you always have to assume there's this chance even if it is controlled) then it could easily be used for nefarious purposes. We've seen that it doesn't take much money to spread a lot of misinformation. Because of this I don't think it would be a good idea to just sell that data to whoever wants it. There could also be problems of resale.

Ads? I'd assume you'd be completely against this, but collecting a whole bunch of voting preferences would probably be incredibly valuable to someone. Just give proper notice.

godelski 7y ago

Doesn't that also potentially undermine democracy? Ads are specifically intended to sway peoples thinking. I know this already happens with politics but do we really need more tools to influence people? (Yes we can do it for good, but there's equal potential for bad) I'm not saying we should, but I'm saying we should think about this before that kind of data is mass gathered and sold.

jedimastert 7y ago
> Doesn't that also potentially undermine democracy? I don't know about that. It's true that ads are meant to sway thoughts, but aren't debates basically supposed to do the same thing? The problem would be misinformation. The information shod definitely be use carefully and thoughtfully, I agree. Or possibly even not collected at all, if at all possible. I was just pointing out one avenue of monetization.
- godelski 7y ago
  I think the difference with debates is that they are moderated and usually fact checked. Ads on the other hand are much more prolific and it would be substantially harder to fact check everything. But the ads isn't my concern, my concern is the data. You could use the data for good. It could help politicians and candidates find out what constituents want to a high accuracy. This would clearly be a good thing. The issue is how that data is handled. If that data becomes public (you always have to assume there's this chance even if it is controlled) then it could easily be used for nefarious purposes. We've seen that it doesn't take much money to spread a lot of misinformation. Because of this I don't think it would be a good idea to just sell that data to whoever wants it. There could also be problems of resale.