3 ms·

Sorry, I definitely did not put as much thought into my comment as I should have and I left out the critical piece of information that really ticked me off. I'm

Sorry, I definitely did not put as much thought into my comment as I should have and I left out the critical piece of information that really ticked me off. I'm one of the nerds who actually reads the privacy documents and Rally's privacy policy[1] has a section titled "How We Use Your Information" that includes: > improving Mozilla’s existing products and services > creating and developing new products All of the marketing copy is about "donating" your data to important research and how "Big Tech has built its success by exploiting your data." Meanwhile Mozilla is doing the exact same thing they're criticizing "big tech" for doing. Tucked away in the fine print is the fact that your data _isn't_ just going to be used for research studies, it's going to be exploited by yet another for-profit tech company. They've just put a nice warm and fuzzy do-gooder wrapper on it. If Rally is transparent about how your data is used like they claim to be they would either (1) not use your data in that way and exclusively allow the data to be used for research, as advertised, or (2) make it abundantly obvious it will be used that way. [1]https://rally.mozilla.org/privacy-policy/index.html https://rally.mozilla.org/privacy-policy/index.html

9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
> If Rally is transparent about how your data is used If Rally was not transparent about this, then you would not have seen that and would not have gotten emotionally triggered by it. But given that you’ve identified a visceral opposition to that, you should consider not opting-in to that particular study.
- xpe 5y ago
  > But given that you’ve identified a visceral opposition to that, you should consider not opting-in to that particular study. The commenter referenced Rally's privacy policy. It is not specific to a particular study.
  - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
    I’m being charitable and leaving room for the possibility that they provide a tighter set of policies for some studies or revise their general policy to make commercial use be a study-by-study determination. Or, just don’t opt-in to any of the Rally studies. Your call, it’s your data.
    - xpe 5y ago
      > Or, just don’t opt-in to any of the Rally studies. Your call, it’s your data. First, a caveat. I don't know the people behind the comments in this sub-thread. I have read almost all of them and find them to be informative and thoughtful. So thanks for that. That said, when I read a comment like the above, what I hear is a mentality of "you are an individual, with power, if you don't like it, act individually". That mentality is not wrong, but is quite limited and incomplete. It overlooks the power and importance of individuals discussing and organizing together, which is often much more powerful than simply "voting with your feet".
      - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        As always, with your replies to me, your spirit/style is much appreciated. > It overlooks the power and importance of individuals discussing and organizing together, which is often much more powerful than simply "voting with your feet". I did indeed purposefully overlook that, but only out of a working assumption that the consent of the governed is there, overall. If there truly is no consent of the governed for informed consent being a sufficient tool for empowerment in these cases, then there are deeper topics that need to be discussed. Some of those topics could lead to conclusions that may have catastrophic implications for modern society, if not discussed in a reasonable and considerate manner. Cancelling entire industries, in one fell swoop, are some of the conclusions being drawn in the current climate, for example. If there is consent of the governed that opt-in is a sufficient tool for empowerment in these cases, then these cases may ultimately be logically reducible to failures to uphold the laws, as they currently exist. To further expound on the latter line of reasoning, these cases seem to anecdotally belong to a few categories: 1) I don’t like advertising, 2) I didn’t know that they could do that, 3) I don’t want anyone watching what I do. Category 1) is a completely understandable sentiment with implications that I currently lack the energy to comment upon. Category 2) should be taken as that individual’s human rights having been violated. Specifically, that situation could arguably be pursued in the United States under the ADA. Enforced broadly, this could have catastrophic consequences to modern society. Enforced judiciously, this could provide much needed social progress. Category 3) is a completely understandable sentiment with implications that I currently lack the energy to comment upon. The category 2) implications do seem to be most relevant to society, at this juncture. edit: I can imagine that a class-action ADA lawsuit against a carefully selected set of defendants (if legally possible) could lead to resolution of this matter in the courts, without calling on the legislature to comment on topics for which they are under-qualified to comment upon.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  I'm one of the very few people who actually read all of the disclosure documents. I wouldn't be surprised if I were the only person who read these documents in their entirety aside from the document drafter(s) themselves. And this wasn't in the privacy notice for a study but for the Rally browser extension. Rather confusingly, Rally has one privacy policy and each individual study will have their own, separate, privacy policy in addition to the Rally privacy policy.
  - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
    Admirable digging, for sure.
- kortilla 5y ago
  > you would not have seen that and would not have gotten emotionally triggered Don’t do that here. The comment is about Rally pretending to be about altruistic academic research while actually being a platform for Mozilla product development.
  - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
    My reply predates this edit from the parent: > Sorry, I definitely did not put as much thought into my comment as I should have and I left out the critical piece of information that really ticked me off.
    - xpe 5y ago
      Such are the perils of edit logs not being available and/or not quoting what you are responding to.
      - CRConrad 5y ago
        TBF, if the stuff that would have needed to be quoted was added after he replied...
xpe 5y ago
>> improving Mozilla’s existing products and services >> creating and developing new products I agree that these are concerning. They seem out of place. If you want to start a petition asking Mozilla to clarify and/or remove these clauses, I would sign it.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  I almost opened an issue on their GitHub[1] (one of their privacy-related documents invites people to "call them on it" if you have privacy concerns) but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. [1]https://github.com/mozilla-rally https://github.com/mozilla-rally
  - Nicksil 5y ago
    >but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. You make it easy for the internet assholes to do this to you. If your HN username is your real name that is a really big problem for your privacy. Your occupation is stated in your profile. Likewise, stating your sex might as well be your privacy's death knell. Become more anonymous to provide less ammunition to those with nothing more to do than torment others, then continue doing the things you feel are the right things to do without excuse.
    - elliekelly 5y ago
      I've been interneting-while-woman for three decades now so of course my username isn't my real name. But (like most developers) my GitHub includes my real name, my photo, and my company, hence my hesitation. I have to wonder, though... are you as quick to chastise the "internet assholes" you see harassing women online as you were to chastise me for having the audacity to admit my gender online?
      - Nicksil 5y ago

9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago

> If Rally is transparent about how your data is used If Rally was not transparent about this, then you would not have seen that and would not have gotten emotionally triggered by it. But given that you’ve identified a visceral opposition to that, you should consider not opting-in to that particular study.

xpe 5y ago
> But given that you’ve identified a visceral opposition to that, you should consider not opting-in to that particular study. The commenter referenced Rally's privacy policy. It is not specific to a particular study.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
  I’m being charitable and leaving room for the possibility that they provide a tighter set of policies for some studies or revise their general policy to make commercial use be a study-by-study determination. Or, just don’t opt-in to any of the Rally studies. Your call, it’s your data.
  - xpe 5y ago
    > Or, just don’t opt-in to any of the Rally studies. Your call, it’s your data. First, a caveat. I don't know the people behind the comments in this sub-thread. I have read almost all of them and find them to be informative and thoughtful. So thanks for that. That said, when I read a comment like the above, what I hear is a mentality of "you are an individual, with power, if you don't like it, act individually". That mentality is not wrong, but is quite limited and incomplete. It overlooks the power and importance of individuals discussing and organizing together, which is often much more powerful than simply "voting with your feet".
    - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
      As always, with your replies to me, your spirit/style is much appreciated. > It overlooks the power and importance of individuals discussing and organizing together, which is often much more powerful than simply "voting with your feet". I did indeed purposefully overlook that, but only out of a working assumption that the consent of the governed is there, overall. If there truly is no consent of the governed for informed consent being a sufficient tool for empowerment in these cases, then there are deeper topics that need to be discussed. Some of those topics could lead to conclusions that may have catastrophic implications for modern society, if not discussed in a reasonable and considerate manner. Cancelling entire industries, in one fell swoop, are some of the conclusions being drawn in the current climate, for example. If there is consent of the governed that opt-in is a sufficient tool for empowerment in these cases, then these cases may ultimately be logically reducible to failures to uphold the laws, as they currently exist. To further expound on the latter line of reasoning, these cases seem to anecdotally belong to a few categories: 1) I don’t like advertising, 2) I didn’t know that they could do that, 3) I don’t want anyone watching what I do. Category 1) is a completely understandable sentiment with implications that I currently lack the energy to comment upon. Category 2) should be taken as that individual’s human rights having been violated. Specifically, that situation could arguably be pursued in the United States under the ADA. Enforced broadly, this could have catastrophic consequences to modern society. Enforced judiciously, this could provide much needed social progress. Category 3) is a completely understandable sentiment with implications that I currently lack the energy to comment upon. The category 2) implications do seem to be most relevant to society, at this juncture. edit: I can imagine that a class-action ADA lawsuit against a carefully selected set of defendants (if legally possible) could lead to resolution of this matter in the courts, without calling on the legislature to comment on topics for which they are under-qualified to comment upon.
elliekelly 5y ago
I'm one of the very few people who actually read all of the disclosure documents. I wouldn't be surprised if I were the only person who read these documents in their entirety aside from the document drafter(s) themselves. And this wasn't in the privacy notice for a study but for the Rally browser extension. Rather confusingly, Rally has one privacy policy and each individual study will have their own, separate, privacy policy in addition to the Rally privacy policy.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
  Admirable digging, for sure.
kortilla 5y ago
> you would not have seen that and would not have gotten emotionally triggered Don’t do that here. The comment is about Rally pretending to be about altruistic academic research while actually being a platform for Mozilla product development.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
  My reply predates this edit from the parent: > Sorry, I definitely did not put as much thought into my comment as I should have and I left out the critical piece of information that really ticked me off.
  - xpe 5y ago
    Such are the perils of edit logs not being available and/or not quoting what you are responding to.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      TBF, if the stuff that would have needed to be quoted was added after he replied...

xpe 5y ago

>> improving Mozilla’s existing products and services >> creating and developing new products I agree that these are concerning. They seem out of place. If you want to start a petition asking Mozilla to clarify and/or remove these clauses, I would sign it.

elliekelly 5y ago
I almost opened an issue on their GitHub[1] (one of their privacy-related documents invites people to "call them on it" if you have privacy concerns) but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. [1]https://github.com/mozilla-rally https://github.com/mozilla-rally
- Nicksil 5y ago
  >but I decided against it because I worried about harassment from sleuthing HN readers finding me on other platforms. Such are the compromises you make as a lady on the internet sometimes. You make it easy for the internet assholes to do this to you. If your HN username is your real name that is a really big problem for your privacy. Your occupation is stated in your profile. Likewise, stating your sex might as well be your privacy's death knell. Become more anonymous to provide less ammunition to those with nothing more to do than torment others, then continue doing the things you feel are the right things to do without excuse.
  - elliekelly 5y ago
    I've been interneting-while-woman for three decades now so of course my username isn't my real name. But (like most developers) my GitHub includes my real name, my photo, and my company, hence my hesitation. I have to wonder, though... are you as quick to chastise the "internet assholes" you see harassing women online as you were to chastise me for having the audacity to admit my gender online?
    - Nicksil 5y ago