4 ms·

Finally, they've started attacking big tech on the privacy front. The whole "monopoly" and "anti-trust" thing was going nowhere. But privacy orders like this ar

Finally, they've started attacking big tech on the privacy front. The whole "monopoly" and "anti-trust" thing was going nowhere. But privacy orders like this are a step in the right direction. And to put the nail in big tech's coffin, congress should pass a law forbidding the sharing of any personal information on any resident of the US for any commercial reason whatsoever. With draconian penalties assessed per user infraction. That would stop these tech companies in their tracks.

bogwog 5y ago
> With draconian penalties assessed per user infraction. You mean like chopping off a limb/finger for every violation? Unfortunately, that won't work for a certain lizardman CEO who is purported to be able to regrow limbs.
- bilbo0s 5y ago
  I was thinking more along the lines of heavy fines. I'm not a big supporter of violence against pharma, tech, and Ag CEOs. I'm not a big supporter of violence against anyone where massive fines will serve the same purpose. In fact, the fines would work better.
ratsmack 5y ago
And how do you feel about sharing the collected data of your conversations and travel with government agencies?
- bilbo0s 5y ago
  I feel there is nothing the government is going to do about that. This doesn't mean that I throw up my hands and say, OK, I'll let everyone have all of my communications logs since the government has them.
  - ratsmack 5y ago
    I personally believe being targeted with advertising is much less intrusive than the government having unfettered access to my daily interactions with people and various institutions. I would prefer to not have to worry about either.
wincy 5y ago
After all, now that the NSA has all their spy networks set up they don’t need the tech companies to do the spying anymore. Time to crack down. Makes me think of an abusive relationship where the abuser is very jealous and protective of the abused. “If anyone spies on my citizens, it’s gonna be me!”
- bilbo0s 5y ago
  I actually agree with this, it is an abusive relationship. Only the abuser has a gun to your head so there's nothing you can do about it.
qeternity 5y ago
> And to put the nail in big tech's coffin, congress should pass a law forbidding the sharing of any personal information on any resident of the US for any commercial reason whatsoever. At this point, a huge number (majority?) of Facebook et al users know what Facebook are doing. They value their own data less than Facebook do and are happy to trade it in return for free social media service. You may not like it, but free people should be able to engage in a transaction if it’s not infringing on other peoples’ rights. I’m not sure why you would know what’s better for them than they would.
- jeffreygoesto 5y ago
  It is infringing other's peoples rights. Shadow profiles are and even if you paid for subscriptions everywhere in the net, you could not get away untracked and being targeted for ads you neither want nor need.
  - qeternity 5y ago
    I’m not saying I agree with it, but what rights are being violated by shadow profiles?
- Mountain_Skies 5y ago
  Facebook shares lots of data about people who have never signed up for a Facebook account. Everyone is a Facebook "user" whether they want to be or not.
  - Supermancho 5y ago
    > Facebook shares lots of data about people who have never signed up for a Facebook account. Everyone is a Facebook "user" whether they want to be or not. Same with Twitch/AMZ, YouTube/GOOG, Target, Wall Street Journal, etc. It's basically the state of digital advertising today, which is not remotely limited to or monopolized by FB. I've worked on the adservers, across multiple companies, for over 15 years now.
  - qeternity 5y ago
dodobirdlord 5y ago
While ultimately a ban on sharing personal information for commercial reasons would be good in the long term, in the short term (many years, certainly, maybe forever) it would serve to entrench existing big tech companies. Google, for example, doesn’t directly share personal information with advertisers. Where side-channels exist that would enable advertisers to extract data from Google, Google has the scale and the resources to create technical solutions like having advertisers send their entire software stack to run in Google datacenters so that Google can ensure nothing is being logged, and force advertisers to comply. Facebook, Amazon, and Apple likely have the resources and scale to pull of the same feats. Anybody else would be put out of business. Hardly a mandate that would make sense in the context of encouraging competition.

bogwog 5y ago

> With draconian penalties assessed per user infraction. You mean like chopping off a limb/finger for every violation? Unfortunately, that won't work for a certain lizardman CEO who is purported to be able to regrow limbs.

bilbo0s 5y ago
I was thinking more along the lines of heavy fines. I'm not a big supporter of violence against pharma, tech, and Ag CEOs. I'm not a big supporter of violence against anyone where massive fines will serve the same purpose. In fact, the fines would work better.

ratsmack 5y ago

And how do you feel about sharing the collected data of your conversations and travel with government agencies?

bilbo0s 5y ago
I feel there is nothing the government is going to do about that. This doesn't mean that I throw up my hands and say, OK, I'll let everyone have all of my communications logs since the government has them.
- ratsmack 5y ago
  I personally believe being targeted with advertising is much less intrusive than the government having unfettered access to my daily interactions with people and various institutions. I would prefer to not have to worry about either.

wincy 5y ago

After all, now that the NSA has all their spy networks set up they don’t need the tech companies to do the spying anymore. Time to crack down. Makes me think of an abusive relationship where the abuser is very jealous and protective of the abused. “If anyone spies on my citizens, it’s gonna be me!”

bilbo0s 5y ago
I actually agree with this, it is an abusive relationship. Only the abuser has a gun to your head so there's nothing you can do about it.

qeternity 5y ago

> And to put the nail in big tech's coffin, congress should pass a law forbidding the sharing of any personal information on any resident of the US for any commercial reason whatsoever. At this point, a huge number (majority?) of Facebook et al users know what Facebook are doing. They value their own data less than Facebook do and are happy to trade it in return for free social media service. You may not like it, but free people should be able to engage in a transaction if it’s not infringing on other peoples’ rights. I’m not sure why you would know what’s better for them than they would.

jeffreygoesto 5y ago
It is infringing other's peoples rights. Shadow profiles are and even if you paid for subscriptions everywhere in the net, you could not get away untracked and being targeted for ads you neither want nor need.
- qeternity 5y ago
  I’m not saying I agree with it, but what rights are being violated by shadow profiles?
Mountain_Skies 5y ago
Facebook shares lots of data about people who have never signed up for a Facebook account. Everyone is a Facebook "user" whether they want to be or not.
- Supermancho 5y ago
  > Facebook shares lots of data about people who have never signed up for a Facebook account. Everyone is a Facebook "user" whether they want to be or not. Same with Twitch/AMZ, YouTube/GOOG, Target, Wall Street Journal, etc. It's basically the state of digital advertising today, which is not remotely limited to or monopolized by FB. I've worked on the adservers, across multiple companies, for over 15 years now.
- qeternity 5y ago

dodobirdlord 5y ago

While ultimately a ban on sharing personal information for commercial reasons would be good in the long term, in the short term (many years, certainly, maybe forever) it would serve to entrench existing big tech companies. Google, for example, doesn’t directly share personal information with advertisers. Where side-channels exist that would enable advertisers to extract data from Google, Google has the scale and the resources to create technical solutions like having advertisers send their entire software stack to run in Google datacenters so that Google can ensure nothing is being logged, and force advertisers to comply. Facebook, Amazon, and Apple likely have the resources and scale to pull of the same feats. Anybody else would be put out of business. Hardly a mandate that would make sense in the context of encouraging competition.