3 ms·

> Are there any examples so far around gross mis-use of this data? To flip the question: how many databases like this haven't been abused? When a corporation

by mLuby 7y ago

> Are there any examples so far around gross mis-use of this data? To flip the question: how many databases like this haven't been abused? When a corporation or government claims new powers over citizens/customers, the burden of proof falls on them to show how they can't/won't abuse it, rather than on the little people to show that it's been abused.

sailfast 7y ago
Agreed - I was trying to get a sense of the problem to-date, mostly. It's extremely important to ensure proper controls and I agree the burden of proof falls on the government to ensure they have controls in place to prevent abuses. Perhaps I am merely surprised this creates so much outrage / surprise in this community. The folks on this website (we) have created so many platforms for sharing personal information publicly on the internet that it of course makes sense that people have been scraping it for years and it's likely stored somewhere and will be used for non-original purposes at some point because of course. As you say, how many data sets have not been abused? Users have published this data themselves, on purpose, on web platforms meant for sharing. I don't think this can be put back in the box. I'm not really sure how you regulate it in any effective way. There are some laws on the books and some corporate penalties but I don't see how you stop this if the model works using public data short of making the data so noisy and useless that it stops being effective (which may have to be the end result)
- mLuby 7y ago
  I think it's the same outrage as when someone uses a telephoto lens to takes pictures of the inside of your home from the street. It's all technically possible, legal(ish), and should have been anticipated by anyone who leaves their windows unblocked, but it's still a clear violation of expectations of a home and of the purpose for those windows. Difference is that we've had hundreds of years to reach consensus on home windows, but barely a decade for social media. Laws are not keeping up with society's expectations, which in turn aren't keeping up with technology.

by mLuby 7y ago

sailfast 7y ago

Agreed - I was trying to get a sense of the problem to-date, mostly. It's extremely important to ensure proper controls and I agree the burden of proof falls on the government to ensure they have controls in place to prevent abuses. Perhaps I am merely surprised this creates so much outrage / surprise in this community. The folks on this website (we) have created so many platforms for sharing personal information publicly on the internet that it of course makes sense that people have been scraping it for years and it's likely stored somewhere and will be used for non-original purposes at some point because of course. As you say, how many data sets have not been abused? Users have published this data themselves, on purpose, on web platforms meant for sharing. I don't think this can be put back in the box. I'm not really sure how you regulate it in any effective way. There are some laws on the books and some corporate penalties but I don't see how you stop this if the model works using public data short of making the data so noisy and useless that it stops being effective (which may have to be the end result)

mLuby 7y ago
I think it's the same outrage as when someone uses a telephoto lens to takes pictures of the inside of your home from the street. It's all technically possible, legal(ish), and should have been anticipated by anyone who leaves their windows unblocked, but it's still a clear violation of expectations of a home and of the purpose for those windows. Difference is that we've had hundreds of years to reach consensus on home windows, but barely a decade for social media. Laws are not keeping up with society's expectations, which in turn aren't keeping up with technology.