4 ms·
Yeah, I have a better idea: They should be mandated to not collect PII from third parties. They have no business giving you my phone number or email, and Facebo
by EarlKing 4y ago
Yeah, I have a better idea: They should be mandated to not collect PII from third parties. They have no business giving you my phone number or email, and Facebook has no business hanging on to it.
- tempodox 4y agoI love the idea. Now we need to convince lawmakers.
- ratg13 4y agoAlready done in Europe. Digital Markets Act will start going into enforcement next year.
- atemerev 4y agoThe "third parties" are usually Whatsapp users who have your phone number in their contacts on their phones (Whatsapp belongs to Facebook). This is how Whatsapp can automatically connect with everyone you have in the contact list. So, if you do that, Whatsapp will stop working.
- EarlKing 4y agoWhatsapp can continue working just fine without this. All you have to do if you want to connect with me on Whatsapp (or anything else) is email me and ask what my account name is, and I either give it to you or I do not. Problem. Fucking. Solved. There is no justification for violating my privacy.
- prmoustache 4y ago> The "third parties" are usually Whatsapp users who have your phone number in their contacts on their phones (Whatsapp belongs to Facebook). This is how Whatsapp can automatically connect with everyone you have in the contact list. > > So, if you do that, Whatsapp will stop working. Not really. Whatsapp should access your contacts on your local devices without sending them to servers. There is no valid reason to do it any differently. It is up to the users to make sure their contacts are in sync on all their devices.
- atemerev 4y agoWell, there will be no business sense for Facebook in deploying a free service like that if it doesn't bring along some business value.
- EarlKing 4y agoThen Facebook should cease to exist. Nothing of value will be lost. Seriously: People should stop making excuses for the Free Market For Surveillance. Anyone who "needs" to violate my privacy to make a buck needs to get a job instead. In all seriousness: Society had an advertising industry for well over a century that didn't require jamming a porkoscope up your ass and everyone got along just fine. Just because one can invade the privacy of billions with impunity nowadays does not by any means imply that you should.
- atemerev 4y agoYes, and people were happily reading news in newspapers for centuries. Targeted advertising exists, it is legal everywhere, and we are way past the point it could be put back in the bottle. What still can (and should) be regulated is privately identifying information management, and so far things are improving in this direction.
- EarlKing 4y agoTargeted advertising is invasive of my privacy, and it doesn't matter if it's legal everywhere -- lots of things are legal everywhere and remain ethically abhorrent -- and insofar as every single user retains control of their individual machines we can put that genie back in the bottle right now just by installing an ad blocker which, in case you haven't noticed, more and more people are doing precisely because of this entitled attitude towards users' personal information. As long as people think that they are entitled to my information I will continue to both use an ad blocker and recommend ad blockers to everyone I know. Stop being nosy.