3 ms·

All user data needs a chain of consent attached to it, that is auditable. You can still try to monetize and infinitely sublicense it, but it can be revoked at

All user data needs a chain of consent attached to it, that is auditable. You can still try to monetize and infinitely sublicense it, but it can be revoked at any time. The consequences for using currently nonconsent data should be steep. Would make better markets of data and monetization paths for individuals.

cryptonector 4y ago
The problem is that users usually have NO CHOICE in the matter. It's "use apps" or "don't use apps", and, actually, it's "use smartphones" or "don't use smartphones". Even where the OS gives the user some choices, users are enticed into letting at least a handful of apps get that kind of data, but the users don't understand the ramifications in the least. And lastly, while these things are disclosed in EUAs and/or other fine print, users a) never read that, b) don't understand the legalese, and/or c) don't understand the ramifications. Apps shouldn't get data that isn't necessary to perform their function, but their function often is only to advertise to you in exchange for the least functionality possible given to you. E.g., when the app is "free". It all sucks, but users are used to it all, have given up or never understood in the first place, and it's too late because now the big tech firms are so few and are so vulnerable to nation state arm twisting anyways that they won't fight on behalf of their users. The ramifications of poor user choices made possible by dark patterns are what we see in TFA. It's like when someone lets <insert-app-here> see their contacts so they can more easily connect with others on that app, and then that app gets to map that user's contacts' relationships and intrude in their privacy. I'm very conscientious about the contacts sharing thing, but I've noticed my friends and acquaintances aren't, therefore I have no privacy even though I try. In the pre-Internet era, everything we did in public was public, yes, but very little of it could possibly be gathered without expending large amounts of labor to do it. We had some privacy in public. But now everything we do in public is gathered (by many entities!) all the time, and much of what we do in private is actually done in public. Worse, we communicate much more often now, and the metadata is generally public (meaning: there's no privacy in it). Therefore we now have no privacy, in almost anything we do. Even when we're having sex in private, if our devices are in the room they can listen, and sometimes even record video of it. So we have NO privacy at all!!
323 4y ago
That's nice in theory, but in practice you get things like GDPR, where you need to submit written requests and provide even more personal identification data (passport photo, ...) to remove your data. And you need to do it one company at a time. And you don't even know the list of companies which have your data.
- vmception 4y ago
  There are plenty of much more inspired ideas and implementations that dont have state or industry backing.
  - krageon 4y ago
    There are not, which is why the law exists. Corporations treat us all like dirt and this kind of thinking is enabling them.
    - vmception 4y ago
      Thats what you got from me not sharing anything yet? Fascinating. So your line of reasoning remains true until it doesn't. Amazing position to hold champ, not the strongest position to strongly hold.
  - maerF0x0 4y ago
    Would you mind please listing some for interested readers?
- BiteCode_dev 4y ago
  Still better than what happens in the US.

cryptonector 4y ago

The problem is that users usually have NO CHOICE in the matter. It's "use apps" or "don't use apps", and, actually, it's "use smartphones" or "don't use smartphones". Even where the OS gives the user some choices, users are enticed into letting at least a handful of apps get that kind of data, but the users don't understand the ramifications in the least. And lastly, while these things are disclosed in EUAs and/or other fine print, users a) never read that, b) don't understand the legalese, and/or c) don't understand the ramifications. Apps shouldn't get data that isn't necessary to perform their function, but their function often is only to advertise to you in exchange for the least functionality possible given to you. E.g., when the app is "free". It all sucks, but users are used to it all, have given up or never understood in the first place, and it's too late because now the big tech firms are so few and are so vulnerable to nation state arm twisting anyways that they won't fight on behalf of their users. The ramifications of poor user choices made possible by dark patterns are what we see in TFA. It's like when someone lets <insert-app-here> see their contacts so they can more easily connect with others on that app, and then that app gets to map that user's contacts' relationships and intrude in their privacy. I'm very conscientious about the contacts sharing thing, but I've noticed my friends and acquaintances aren't, therefore I have no privacy even though I try. In the pre-Internet era, everything we did in public was public, yes, but very little of it could possibly be gathered without expending large amounts of labor to do it. We had some privacy in public. But now everything we do in public is gathered (by many entities!) all the time, and much of what we do in private is actually done in public. Worse, we communicate much more often now, and the metadata is generally public (meaning: there's no privacy in it). Therefore we now have no privacy, in almost anything we do. Even when we're having sex in private, if our devices are in the room they can listen, and sometimes even record video of it. So we have NO privacy at all!!

323 4y ago

That's nice in theory, but in practice you get things like GDPR, where you need to submit written requests and provide even more personal identification data (passport photo, ...) to remove your data. And you need to do it one company at a time. And you don't even know the list of companies which have your data.

vmception 4y ago
There are plenty of much more inspired ideas and implementations that dont have state or industry backing.
- krageon 4y ago
  There are not, which is why the law exists. Corporations treat us all like dirt and this kind of thinking is enabling them.
  - vmception 4y ago
    Thats what you got from me not sharing anything yet? Fascinating. So your line of reasoning remains true until it doesn't. Amazing position to hold champ, not the strongest position to strongly hold.
- maerF0x0 4y ago
  Would you mind please listing some for interested readers?
BiteCode_dev 4y ago
Still better than what happens in the US.