6 ms·

I remember that story about Zachary McCoy. This whole thing continues to get worse quick and will continue to get worse. I know people say we need legislation a

I remember that story about Zachary McCoy. This whole thing continues to get worse quick and will continue to get worse. I know people say we need legislation and regulation on data privacy and tech companies which we do. But before that gets taken seriously (at least in the US) it's going to take something real scandalous done by tech companies and actually affect the common folk where they actually start to care. Right now the average user does not care at all about security and privacy except the small niche groups of us on HN, Reddit and other tech/Geek forums. The regular average user will continue to still use Facebook, Twitter, Google, Apple etc. As long as the average user keeps using their services and vote with their data and wallets I doubt much will change anytime soon. Until we get some real data privacy laws and regulation we just have to matters into our own hands. I don't use Google search unless I need to, and always have my VPN on (Mullvad). Edit: Then again, once we did get data privacy laws and regulation could we actually trust the companies and politicians and LE. Probably not. That's why I also feel the laws and regulation needed for tech is more of like a "The public thinks we did something" type of situation. There will still and always will be under the table deals. If the regular user can realize eventually how they feed these companies with their data and what happens with their data it could also hinder or start to hinder data collection at the government level (NSA, GCHQ, Project Raven and so on).

NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
What about raising money to buy a bunch of data from, say, the Washington, D.C. area and then de-anonymizing it. I wonder what we'd learn...
- bradlys 5y ago
  I really doubt legislation would come into effect. Instead, the people organizing the effort will be hunted down, prosecuted, and turned into examples of what happens when you try to fuck with people in high level government positions.
  - NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
    That's a coordinated response. We don't want to invoke a coordinated response. Pick some prominent people to make examples of--people who will make many others happy by their embarassment.
    - hilbert42 5y ago
      The whole matter would likely come to a head very quickly if said data were sent to politicians. Seeing their own data exposed would not only be embarrassing but a wakeup call to everyone. Not only would the laws quickly change but also we'd soon learn about some of the nefarious antics and unsavory deals made by our governors.
      - NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
        That's the hope
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  I wonder how a different tactic would fare: 1. Buy some legit(ish) dataset for marketing purposes. I hear DMVs in the US like to sell people's data. 2. Do a direct marketing job: send every single person in the dataset a snail mail letter with a printout of all the data you have on them, and a reference to where you got it from. I hear USPS offers good rates for bulk spam campaigns; they apparently live off it. That sounds like something that is in range of crowdfunding money, could possibly be fully legal, and sidesteps the issue of news outlets killing the message, with (as I recently heard) their policy of not reporting data from leaked datasets.
  - evilos 5y ago
    This would cause so much chaos and probably result in thousands of divorces. Maybe we could get a lawyers group to front the money lol.
  - VRay 5y ago
    Man, that would be great. I'll bet it'd be doable for anyone whose name is tied to public records via home ownership too Scale up what they did to Trump for this NY Times piece: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/location-data-national-security.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/locat... See if people keep clicking "Allow" on their phone games after that goes out.. Of course, what'd actually happen is everyone would just attack the messenger. Maybe there'd be some super half-assed knee-jerk law thrown into place If I ever get terminal cancer I'll see if I can throw something together before I kick the bucket, haha.
    - NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
      I think carefully designing the campaign from the start to avoid a PR backlash would be really important. Doable, too.
  - sroussey 5y ago
    I actually looked into it. They are smart on this and won’t sell to you.
- dillondoyle 5y ago
  Has happened with grindr a few times that I know of. https://accesswdun.com/article/2021/7/1024075 https://accesswdun.com/article/2021/7/1024075 And the Strava on military bases thing. https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-fitness-trackers-privacy/ https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-f...
slownews45 5y ago
HN is pretty out of touch I think. When I talk to non HN crowd. * Apple's efforts around blocking CASM are applauded * Folks are GLAD that cops are using tech to catch criminals * Folks don't have a ton of trust that the regulations will help their lives, or block govt from doing things, but do imagine they will be annoying (more permission banners / cookies popups etc). It would be interesting to look at other countries where the govt has gotten more hands on with regulations in this area (data retention etc). I know in some spaces I've seen the regulations actually end up REQUIRING retention of records, or the liability risks require retention of video for a long time (ie, railroads have REALLY dialed up use of video given the claims they were facing in terms of running into people - once they started tracking a retaining a lot more - claims went way down - not saying folks were lying before but they are going to push back on getting rid of their data collection at this point unless laws change).
- sjwalter 5y ago
  I dunno, I mostly agree with you, but I think lately, at least with my family and friends, the coronavirus political response has made many more people much more skeptical about centralized authority figures. The narrative that is commonly recounted is that it's obvious that the people in authority are either incredibly incompetent or crazily power-hungry, and both are leading many of my family and friends to question everything. I mean total normies who are otherwise just typical taxpayers. It's funny in a Kafka kinda way to witness the slow erosion of trust in institutions. Don't get me wrong, I love institutions. Just seems to me and basically everyone I know that the people who should know the most about how trust is built, do everything possible to kill off that trust.
  - lavabiopsy 5y ago
    I'm just curious: What exactly is seen as being new or remarkable about the failure of some leaders during this pandemic? I share the frustration about these failures, but are your friends/family too young to know about other spectacular failures like Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or the Iraq War, etc? (I could go on) Edit: I just realized my second question is somewhat US-centric so if you aren't from the US then I apologize, please disregard that comment.
Lamad123 5y ago
I hope more people get thrown in jail for not caring about privacy, so they and we learn to care more.
1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
Privacy and security regulation, nor antitrust regulation, are viable means to stop tech companies from creating problems. The way to stop them is to regulate online advertising. Tech companies have no other way to make money. Ignoring this is like trying to fight a war without ever trying to interfere with the enemy's supply chains. The constant focus on the majority of web users, i.e., "the average user", is misplaced and suffers from an incorrect assumption. Namely, that a majority of the public needs to support some law before it can be passed by a legislature. Most legislation does not come from mass outpouring of support by the public, like the kind "HN/Reddit/other tech/Geek forum" comments call for. It comes from lobbying, usually professional, and sometimes community activism. The same "niche" groups that people in the these forums like to downplay are not necessarily much smaller and may even be larger than groups who have successfully gotten laws passed at state and federal levels. What is necessary is some number of people who do understand the issues to initiate the lobbying and campaigning; the awareness and support of the "average constituent" is never a prerequisite. Nor is it true that every law passed serves an enormous number of constituents, i.e., "the average constituent". Sometimes laws only serve small groups of people who have special needs (or wants). The notion of the "average user" really has no bearing on whether legislation is passed or not. What matters is the small group of people who are driving the campaign to have legislation passed. That group is unlikely to comprise the "average user", its going to be people who understand the issues to which the proposed law is targeted and can articulate them to people who know how to work the system to get laws passed. The more middlemen people accept when using the internet, the more parties that can be subpoenaed. Those are the consequences of "cloud computing" and "SaaS". But to think that no law can be passed to address the harms that "tech" companies present, because the "average user" does not understand these problems, makes no sense. Stop focusing on "the average user". Thats for the "tech" companies to do. For the non-average users, its a waste of time.
- cybersol 5y ago
  When both the government and the advertising companies have an aligned incentive to spy on us all, Why would the government pass either privacy or advertising laws?
dcow 5y ago
On some days I believe the molten veins of liberty in the US have cooled and solidified—structurally succumb to the great machine—bound by economic needs and principles. It’s not about we the people anymore. We won’t see any real change; corruption has seeped in and taken hold. Right now, if there’s money to be made, it’s legal. (Except if it involves giving women power, so sex work remains taboo and OnlyFans is under attack.) Liberty was never about doing whatever the fuck you wanted, it was about collective ownership of structures of control. Does the average citizen participate in the economy with any shred of liberty? Who tells the reserve bank and payment processors how to wield their power over currency? Are you free to wander cyberspace and loot more than 500GB or 1TB of its treasures? Who innately owns your data? Is encryption speech? etc… The only possible way to fix these problems is to code solutions into the fabric of society. And to do that you need a young molten society of people that fundamentally communicate using a common implementation language working toward a shared vision. This society understands the principles supporting the solutions and is willing to sacrifice in order to maintain a system which innately resists deprivation of liberty. You need birth and.. eventually.. death. We won’t see meaningful data privacy without a revolution. On some days I feel this way.
- banannaise 5y ago
  Revolution sucks for all involved. Unfortunately, at this point, the alternatives are looking even worse.

NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago

What about raising money to buy a bunch of data from, say, the Washington, D.C. area and then de-anonymizing it. I wonder what we'd learn...

bradlys 5y ago
I really doubt legislation would come into effect. Instead, the people organizing the effort will be hunted down, prosecuted, and turned into examples of what happens when you try to fuck with people in high level government positions.
- NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
  That's a coordinated response. We don't want to invoke a coordinated response. Pick some prominent people to make examples of--people who will make many others happy by their embarassment.
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    The whole matter would likely come to a head very quickly if said data were sent to politicians. Seeing their own data exposed would not only be embarrassing but a wakeup call to everyone. Not only would the laws quickly change but also we'd soon learn about some of the nefarious antics and unsavory deals made by our governors.
    - NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
      That's the hope
TeMPOraL 5y ago
I wonder how a different tactic would fare: 1. Buy some legit(ish) dataset for marketing purposes. I hear DMVs in the US like to sell people's data. 2. Do a direct marketing job: send every single person in the dataset a snail mail letter with a printout of all the data you have on them, and a reference to where you got it from. I hear USPS offers good rates for bulk spam campaigns; they apparently live off it. That sounds like something that is in range of crowdfunding money, could possibly be fully legal, and sidesteps the issue of news outlets killing the message, with (as I recently heard) their policy of not reporting data from leaked datasets.
- evilos 5y ago
  This would cause so much chaos and probably result in thousands of divorces. Maybe we could get a lawyers group to front the money lol.
- VRay 5y ago
  Man, that would be great. I'll bet it'd be doable for anyone whose name is tied to public records via home ownership too Scale up what they did to Trump for this NY Times piece: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/location-data-national-security.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/locat... See if people keep clicking "Allow" on their phone games after that goes out.. Of course, what'd actually happen is everyone would just attack the messenger. Maybe there'd be some super half-assed knee-jerk law thrown into place If I ever get terminal cancer I'll see if I can throw something together before I kick the bucket, haha.
  - NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
    I think carefully designing the campaign from the start to avoid a PR backlash would be really important. Doable, too.
- sroussey 5y ago
  I actually looked into it. They are smart on this and won’t sell to you.
dillondoyle 5y ago
Has happened with grindr a few times that I know of. https://accesswdun.com/article/2021/7/1024075 https://accesswdun.com/article/2021/7/1024075 And the Strava on military bases thing. https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-fitness-trackers-privacy/ https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-f...

slownews45 5y ago

HN is pretty out of touch I think. When I talk to non HN crowd. * Apple's efforts around blocking CASM are applauded * Folks are GLAD that cops are using tech to catch criminals * Folks don't have a ton of trust that the regulations will help their lives, or block govt from doing things, but do imagine they will be annoying (more permission banners / cookies popups etc). It would be interesting to look at other countries where the govt has gotten more hands on with regulations in this area (data retention etc). I know in some spaces I've seen the regulations actually end up REQUIRING retention of records, or the liability risks require retention of video for a long time (ie, railroads have REALLY dialed up use of video given the claims they were facing in terms of running into people - once they started tracking a retaining a lot more - claims went way down - not saying folks were lying before but they are going to push back on getting rid of their data collection at this point unless laws change).

sjwalter 5y ago
I dunno, I mostly agree with you, but I think lately, at least with my family and friends, the coronavirus political response has made many more people much more skeptical about centralized authority figures. The narrative that is commonly recounted is that it's obvious that the people in authority are either incredibly incompetent or crazily power-hungry, and both are leading many of my family and friends to question everything. I mean total normies who are otherwise just typical taxpayers. It's funny in a Kafka kinda way to witness the slow erosion of trust in institutions. Don't get me wrong, I love institutions. Just seems to me and basically everyone I know that the people who should know the most about how trust is built, do everything possible to kill off that trust.
- lavabiopsy 5y ago
  I'm just curious: What exactly is seen as being new or remarkable about the failure of some leaders during this pandemic? I share the frustration about these failures, but are your friends/family too young to know about other spectacular failures like Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or the Iraq War, etc? (I could go on) Edit: I just realized my second question is somewhat US-centric so if you aren't from the US then I apologize, please disregard that comment.

Lamad123 5y ago

I hope more people get thrown in jail for not caring about privacy, so they and we learn to care more.

1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago

Privacy and security regulation, nor antitrust regulation, are viable means to stop tech companies from creating problems. The way to stop them is to regulate online advertising. Tech companies have no other way to make money. Ignoring this is like trying to fight a war without ever trying to interfere with the enemy's supply chains. The constant focus on the majority of web users, i.e., "the average user", is misplaced and suffers from an incorrect assumption. Namely, that a majority of the public needs to support some law before it can be passed by a legislature. Most legislation does not come from mass outpouring of support by the public, like the kind "HN/Reddit/other tech/Geek forum" comments call for. It comes from lobbying, usually professional, and sometimes community activism. The same "niche" groups that people in the these forums like to downplay are not necessarily much smaller and may even be larger than groups who have successfully gotten laws passed at state and federal levels. What is necessary is some number of people who do understand the issues to initiate the lobbying and campaigning; the awareness and support of the "average constituent" is never a prerequisite. Nor is it true that every law passed serves an enormous number of constituents, i.e., "the average constituent". Sometimes laws only serve small groups of people who have special needs (or wants). The notion of the "average user" really has no bearing on whether legislation is passed or not. What matters is the small group of people who are driving the campaign to have legislation passed. That group is unlikely to comprise the "average user", its going to be people who understand the issues to which the proposed law is targeted and can articulate them to people who know how to work the system to get laws passed. The more middlemen people accept when using the internet, the more parties that can be subpoenaed. Those are the consequences of "cloud computing" and "SaaS". But to think that no law can be passed to address the harms that "tech" companies present, because the "average user" does not understand these problems, makes no sense. Stop focusing on "the average user". Thats for the "tech" companies to do. For the non-average users, its a waste of time.

cybersol 5y ago
When both the government and the advertising companies have an aligned incentive to spy on us all, Why would the government pass either privacy or advertising laws?

dcow 5y ago

On some days I believe the molten veins of liberty in the US have cooled and solidified—structurally succumb to the great machine—bound by economic needs and principles. It’s not about we the people anymore. We won’t see any real change; corruption has seeped in and taken hold. Right now, if there’s money to be made, it’s legal. (Except if it involves giving women power, so sex work remains taboo and OnlyFans is under attack.) Liberty was never about doing whatever the fuck you wanted, it was about collective ownership of structures of control. Does the average citizen participate in the economy with any shred of liberty? Who tells the reserve bank and payment processors how to wield their power over currency? Are you free to wander cyberspace and loot more than 500GB or 1TB of its treasures? Who innately owns your data? Is encryption speech? etc… The only possible way to fix these problems is to code solutions into the fabric of society. And to do that you need a young molten society of people that fundamentally communicate using a common implementation language working toward a shared vision. This society understands the principles supporting the solutions and is willing to sacrifice in order to maintain a system which innately resists deprivation of liberty. You need birth and.. eventually.. death. We won’t see meaningful data privacy without a revolution. On some days I feel this way.

banannaise 5y ago
Revolution sucks for all involved. Unfortunately, at this point, the alternatives are looking even worse.