6 ms·

Google and FB are unscrupulous and terrible. But it is absurd to insist the only two valid transaction models are offer paid service (which I assume means for

Google and FB are unscrupulous and terrible. But it is absurd to insist the only two valid transaction models are offer paid service (which I assume means for money) or gift. Even in your hypothetical, it would not be unreasonable for them to give me a donut in exchange for taking notes on which donut I like and handing me a coupon for my next donut. To me, the issue is not the data collection. It is the lack of transparency.

southerntofu 5y ago
> To me, the issue is not the data collection. It is the lack of transparency. I don't exactly disagree, but it's hardly comparable. As a human being, i can grasp the notion of giving you 30 minutes of my time to try different cookie flavors and tell you what i think. I could likewise understand the notion/consequences of filling a one-page questionnaire for Facebook's advertisement engine in exchange for free service. But i don't think implicit background data collection on anything they can (my phonebook, really?!) is a reasonable contract, because it's hard to comprehend what are the limits and consequences of that. So it's not just "lack of transparency". I would consider it abusive behavior even if the sign up form read "I WILL FOLLOW AND WATCH YOU EVERYWHERE YOU GO AND TELL ALL MY FRIENDS ABOUT YOUR GREAT ADVENTURES"... especially considering they would probably make it look like a cute pet saying that. I would not consider it abusive behavior if their ad business was *not* collecting any information from the users (except maybe like i said a sign-up questionnaire) and was just doing advertisement.
- kajaktum 5y ago
  I think that free services are a mistake. But for whatever reason people _really_ like it. Take Youtube. It offers a way to avoid all ads and yet people who spent hours upon hours every day either watching videos or listening to music with it refuses to spend a dime on it. And yet, they also complain that ads are ruining Youtube and so they installed adblocker specifically for it. Since everyone refuses to _directly_ spend money, companies just move to taking money from us indirectly. To me "free services" is like a casinos, its easy to say that you should "just not do/use it lmao" but its extremely hard to think back and consider why Reddit/Hackernews/Youtube/Twitter/Facebook is free and what are the consequences/incentives of it being "free" will mean to our society. It is simply too enticing.
  - ddingus 5y ago
    I am one of those people who really likes it. And I hate it too, and for all the reasons given here. (Did not check them all, but it is a pretty safe bet.) Hating it all means I am on board with activism, advocacy, law, whatever we need to do in order to establish / extend the Bill Of Rights into digital spaces. Society, tech and the law have collided and that mess is ongoing and expanding. Imagine one of those cars smashing into a train with the dummy in it. It crumples, folds, then pieces fly off, the dummy takes damage, and just down the track is a truck, and a bus with kids in it, and so on... That train is heavy, well powered with spiffy tech, and it is powering right through the public! Hate it, but I am quite sure I can't do much, even resisting, doing all the work to anonymize, is a total PITA. Drains the value right out of it all, out of me, my life, and I just do not have time for it, unless a lot of us have time together somehow. And I think dollars are the only language our oppressors, abusers, and the like will both hear and act on because they must! Lessig wrote about things that regulate our behavior: Norms. They do not prevent anything, but do reward or punish. Law. Like norms, but with real teeth well beyond praise and shunning. Physics. The rules of the world will prevent actions. The more we understand, the more this world permits. Money / markets. These also can prevent things. If we cannot afford an action... It will take a lot of us setting norms, doing things that cost, and all of that rolling up into law more relevant than this current "wild west" is. I really like it because I get to do things, have access to information that was the stuff of dreams not so long ago. It is all as empowering as it is exploitative.
    - southerntofu 5y ago
      > unless a lot of us have time together somehow Yes, let's do this. Let's get together and create new, more humane standards. Get involved with an educational/cultural copyleft non-profit like Framasoft, a legal/lobbying organization like LQDN/EFF, a local hosting cooperative that provides GAFAM alternatives with a sustainable model (libreho.st/chatons.org networks), a local self-organized/DIY ISP (guifi.net/ffdn.org/freifunk.net networks), a self-organized FLOSS coop, etc.
      - ddingus 5y ago
lobocinza 5y ago
> Even in your hypothetical, it would not be unreasonable for them to give me a donut in exchange for taking notes on which donut I like and handing me a coupon for my next donut. Google Rewards

southerntofu 5y ago

> To me, the issue is not the data collection. It is the lack of transparency. I don't exactly disagree, but it's hardly comparable. As a human being, i can grasp the notion of giving you 30 minutes of my time to try different cookie flavors and tell you what i think. I could likewise understand the notion/consequences of filling a one-page questionnaire for Facebook's advertisement engine in exchange for free service. But i don't think implicit background data collection on anything they can (my phonebook, really?!) is a reasonable contract, because it's hard to comprehend what are the limits and consequences of that. So it's not just "lack of transparency". I would consider it abusive behavior even if the sign up form read "I WILL FOLLOW AND WATCH YOU EVERYWHERE YOU GO AND TELL ALL MY FRIENDS ABOUT YOUR GREAT ADVENTURES"... especially considering they would probably make it look like a cute pet saying that. I would not consider it abusive behavior if their ad business was *not* collecting any information from the users (except maybe like i said a sign-up questionnaire) and was just doing advertisement.

kajaktum 5y ago
I think that free services are a mistake. But for whatever reason people _really_ like it. Take Youtube. It offers a way to avoid all ads and yet people who spent hours upon hours every day either watching videos or listening to music with it refuses to spend a dime on it. And yet, they also complain that ads are ruining Youtube and so they installed adblocker specifically for it. Since everyone refuses to _directly_ spend money, companies just move to taking money from us indirectly. To me "free services" is like a casinos, its easy to say that you should "just not do/use it lmao" but its extremely hard to think back and consider why Reddit/Hackernews/Youtube/Twitter/Facebook is free and what are the consequences/incentives of it being "free" will mean to our society. It is simply too enticing.
- ddingus 5y ago
  I am one of those people who really likes it. And I hate it too, and for all the reasons given here. (Did not check them all, but it is a pretty safe bet.) Hating it all means I am on board with activism, advocacy, law, whatever we need to do in order to establish / extend the Bill Of Rights into digital spaces. Society, tech and the law have collided and that mess is ongoing and expanding. Imagine one of those cars smashing into a train with the dummy in it. It crumples, folds, then pieces fly off, the dummy takes damage, and just down the track is a truck, and a bus with kids in it, and so on... That train is heavy, well powered with spiffy tech, and it is powering right through the public! Hate it, but I am quite sure I can't do much, even resisting, doing all the work to anonymize, is a total PITA. Drains the value right out of it all, out of me, my life, and I just do not have time for it, unless a lot of us have time together somehow. And I think dollars are the only language our oppressors, abusers, and the like will both hear and act on because they must! Lessig wrote about things that regulate our behavior: Norms. They do not prevent anything, but do reward or punish. Law. Like norms, but with real teeth well beyond praise and shunning. Physics. The rules of the world will prevent actions. The more we understand, the more this world permits. Money / markets. These also can prevent things. If we cannot afford an action... It will take a lot of us setting norms, doing things that cost, and all of that rolling up into law more relevant than this current "wild west" is. I really like it because I get to do things, have access to information that was the stuff of dreams not so long ago. It is all as empowering as it is exploitative.
  - southerntofu 5y ago
    > unless a lot of us have time together somehow Yes, let's do this. Let's get together and create new, more humane standards. Get involved with an educational/cultural copyleft non-profit like Framasoft, a legal/lobbying organization like LQDN/EFF, a local hosting cooperative that provides GAFAM alternatives with a sustainable model (libreho.st/chatons.org networks), a local self-organized/DIY ISP (guifi.net/ffdn.org/freifunk.net networks), a self-organized FLOSS coop, etc.
    - ddingus 5y ago

lobocinza 5y ago

> Even in your hypothetical, it would not be unreasonable for them to give me a donut in exchange for taking notes on which donut I like and handing me a coupon for my next donut. Google Rewards