3 ms·

I'm not sure it's necessarily negligence. I can also see the scenario where they feel forced to monetize the data if their competitors do. All it takes is one

by dhimes 5y ago

I'm not sure it's necessarily negligence. I can also see the scenario where they feel forced to monetize the data if their competitors do. All it takes is one morally bankrupt decision (or negligent, if we're being charitable) to start a race to the bottom. Any push-back will be met with "well, it's not illegal, our competitors are doing it, and we're obligated to do what's best for our shareholders." That's why I'm in favor of regulations/laws to stop this crap. Good limits on behavior help honest business people.

Aromasin 5y ago
I'd argue that "feeling forced" because of competitors behavior is no excuse at all. I work in a field where facial recognition is rife. Despite this, our company has a no tolerance policy for such technology. We feel the holding such beliefs makes not only common sense, but business sense. The best and most intelligent people I believe are also more often than not good people, and good people don't want to work for an evil company. If you want the best and brightest, then have policy that attracts them, and you'll succeed regardless. To add, regulations/laws are being made by governments such that this data must be available to them to "protect the people". We can't rely on them to solves this. You only have to take a look at China and Australia to see where this is going. If the government isn't going to fix the problem in race to the bottom, then we as the authors of such technologies should try our best in their stead. I'm not going to jump off a bridge because others do, and it shouldn't be acceptable for businesses to monetize peoples personal data just because competitors do. I hope that with the advent of ethical consumerism, companies that take the morale high ground on issues like this succeed in spite of the monetary downsides, and educated consumers will pay the premium/make the switch to platforms that do so. It's already evident with the mass migration away from Facebook as a platform, following the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and the now regular use of VPN's by many people. I hope such momentum keeps up.

by dhimes 5y ago

Aromasin 5y ago

I'd argue that "feeling forced" because of competitors behavior is no excuse at all. I work in a field where facial recognition is rife. Despite this, our company has a no tolerance policy for such technology. We feel the holding such beliefs makes not only common sense, but business sense. The best and most intelligent people I believe are also more often than not good people, and good people don't want to work for an evil company. If you want the best and brightest, then have policy that attracts them, and you'll succeed regardless. To add, regulations/laws are being made by governments such that this data must be available to them to "protect the people". We can't rely on them to solves this. You only have to take a look at China and Australia to see where this is going. If the government isn't going to fix the problem in race to the bottom, then we as the authors of such technologies should try our best in their stead. I'm not going to jump off a bridge because others do, and it shouldn't be acceptable for businesses to monetize peoples personal data just because competitors do. I hope that with the advent of ethical consumerism, companies that take the morale high ground on issues like this succeed in spite of the monetary downsides, and educated consumers will pay the premium/make the switch to platforms that do so. It's already evident with the mass migration away from Facebook as a platform, following the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and the now regular use of VPN's by many people. I hope such momentum keeps up.