3 ms·

What's the basis for this advice? Personally I'd be far more interested to learn that someone running for office refuses to use a credit card to buy groceries

What's the basis for this advice? Personally I'd be far more interested to learn that someone running for office refuses to use a credit card to buy groceries because they fear having that information collected and used against them... than that they once spent $500 in a single month on Twinkies. If someone wants to use your spending history against you they don't actually need your credit card bills these days, they can just make something up. Look at the insanity that people managed to create out of John Podesta's office pizza orders.

shishy 3y ago
I interpreted it more as “it’s a trail of information that could be used against you” instead of literally, but I could be wrong
- jameshart 3y ago
  If you look at the recent history of scandals that have had zero to negative reputational impact on politicians and public figures in Western democracies - we’re talking Access Hollywood, tax fraud, undeclared gifts, gross nepotism, punching journalists, flouting public health laws, sexual impropriety, lying about your career and life story, mishandling of classified information, and just plain incompetence - what on earth do you think the harm could be of someone getting hold of someone’s old credit card bills?
  - courseofaction 3y ago
    A resourced adversary relentlessly publicizing them?
    - scubbo 3y ago
      Given how relentlessly (just to pick a particular example) Epstein's crimes, accomplices, and associated have been publicized, and the negligible impact, why do you think that would be impactful?
    - jameshart 3y ago
      Seems like it’s pretty tricky to make anything stick: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-piled-up-credit-card-debt-by-purchasing-nationals-tickets-white-house-says/2018/07/11/8e3ad7d6-8460-11e8-9e80-403a221946a7_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/supreme-court-...
    - vkou 3y ago
      And literally nobody would care. Regardless of whether the accusations are true or not, the other side is already convinced the politician's in question is a baby-blood-drinking child abuser, while their side will be convinced its just a baseless smear campaign by done by butt-hurt losers. Life isn't a song, nobody in politics these days actually faces the consequences just because they were a rapist/adulterer/wearing blackface/drag/doing felony fraud/etc.
raincom 3y ago
Because three letter agencies have a huge incentive to trawl through politicians' private lives through credit card purchase data, and use that against them if they don't want to toe the line of these agencies, whose ex-employees are guests on the main stream media. Just leak enough to derail any politician.
- jameshart 3y ago
  There's presumably a lot of evidence of this you can point to...?
  - politician 3y ago
    Read about J. Edgar Hoover.
    - jameshart 3y ago
      Is he back?!
      - mixmastamyk 3y ago
        Obtuse reverse skepticism is not a good look.
        jameshart 3y ago
        Pointing to a guy who’s been dead 50 years seems like weak evidence for the claim that government agencies are widely incentivized to undermine political candidates by… selectively leaking their grocery shopping habits?
        mixmastamyk 3y ago
        They’ll look for anything they can find, when they need to. There are whole organizations devoted to digging up dirt, and others devoted to countering/deflecting it. Risk minimization sounds prudent if you’re a target.
red-iron-pine 3y ago
> What's the basis for this advice? "The GoBeRmEnT Is GoNa TrAcK YoU" Listen, you got a cell phone, and chances are that's going to give away far, far more than data that your credit card company holds on to. They're just going to have a line -- "Food Lion, [Date] $88.23" -- not detailed list of your purchases. Meanwhile if you use a membership card at any sort of grocery store, they absolutely will associate it with you; in many cases you have to register that card with your name and phone in order to use the points. Cash or credit, that's tracking you. Until modern social media that -- grocery store membership cards -- were one of the best predictors of age, income, gender, etc. available.
- fbdab103 3y ago
  That's why you should always check to see if some kind soul has pre-registered [local area code]-867-5309
  - jachee 3y ago
    I once used that as my number at Garage Center, then didn’t shop there for ~10 years. When I went back, I’d forgotten. The kid at the register tried looking me up by email, my actual cell number, my previous one, and then finally resorted to *gasp* my actual name. Then, having found me, I asked what number was in there, and he proceeded to read, with exactly zero recognition, <area code> 867-5309, and I just laughed on the outside, and cried a little on the inside.
- dahart 3y ago
  It’s not the government that concerns me, it’s the corporations. And I don’t think it’s a contest or even matters if cell phones give more data. I’m worried about both.
  - caeril 3y ago
    No corporation can point a gun at my head and force me into a steel cage. No matter how evil and corrupt a given corporation is, it could never be as bad as a government.
dahart 3y ago
A friend who worked in credit finance many years ago warned me they were “thinking” (wink wink) about doing things like selling your food purchase history to medical insurance companies for the purposes of declining claims on the basis of long-term bad eating habits. I believe it was and still is illegal, but if corporations are allowed to do this, then they will, and it’s worth it to them. I wouldn’t conflate political shenanigans and things that make the news with systemic forces. Made up things don’t always, or even often, pass muster in court. But true information being lawfully used against you will result in no legal recourse.
- frfsfgxffd 3y ago
  ...this is already legal for some decades. if you are in a rewards program you agreed to have you anonymized sales history (i mean, they will not list "ate burgers" but "ate at fiveguys" is pretty similar). after that you need some magic to deanonymize the anonymized data, but in the 90s plenty of people claimed to do that already. the famous case was infact with health insurance and burgers... but i can't recall any names. edit: in the usa

shishy 3y ago

I interpreted it more as “it’s a trail of information that could be used against you” instead of literally, but I could be wrong

jameshart 3y ago
If you look at the recent history of scandals that have had zero to negative reputational impact on politicians and public figures in Western democracies - we’re talking Access Hollywood, tax fraud, undeclared gifts, gross nepotism, punching journalists, flouting public health laws, sexual impropriety, lying about your career and life story, mishandling of classified information, and just plain incompetence - what on earth do you think the harm could be of someone getting hold of someone’s old credit card bills?
- courseofaction 3y ago
  A resourced adversary relentlessly publicizing them?
  - scubbo 3y ago
    Given how relentlessly (just to pick a particular example) Epstein's crimes, accomplices, and associated have been publicized, and the negligible impact, why do you think that would be impactful?
  - jameshart 3y ago
    Seems like it’s pretty tricky to make anything stick: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-piled-up-credit-card-debt-by-purchasing-nationals-tickets-white-house-says/2018/07/11/8e3ad7d6-8460-11e8-9e80-403a221946a7_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/supreme-court-...
  - vkou 3y ago
    And literally nobody would care. Regardless of whether the accusations are true or not, the other side is already convinced the politician's in question is a baby-blood-drinking child abuser, while their side will be convinced its just a baseless smear campaign by done by butt-hurt losers. Life isn't a song, nobody in politics these days actually faces the consequences just because they were a rapist/adulterer/wearing blackface/drag/doing felony fraud/etc.

raincom 3y ago

Because three letter agencies have a huge incentive to trawl through politicians' private lives through credit card purchase data, and use that against them if they don't want to toe the line of these agencies, whose ex-employees are guests on the main stream media. Just leak enough to derail any politician.

jameshart 3y ago
There's presumably a lot of evidence of this you can point to...?
- politician 3y ago
  Read about J. Edgar Hoover.
  - jameshart 3y ago
    Is he back?!
    - mixmastamyk 3y ago
      Obtuse reverse skepticism is not a good look.
      - jameshart 3y ago
        Pointing to a guy who’s been dead 50 years seems like weak evidence for the claim that government agencies are widely incentivized to undermine political candidates by… selectively leaking their grocery shopping habits?
        mixmastamyk 3y ago
        They’ll look for anything they can find, when they need to. There are whole organizations devoted to digging up dirt, and others devoted to countering/deflecting it. Risk minimization sounds prudent if you’re a target.

red-iron-pine 3y ago

> What's the basis for this advice? "The GoBeRmEnT Is GoNa TrAcK YoU" Listen, you got a cell phone, and chances are that's going to give away far, far more than data that your credit card company holds on to. They're just going to have a line -- "Food Lion, [Date] $88.23" -- not detailed list of your purchases. Meanwhile if you use a membership card at any sort of grocery store, they absolutely will associate it with you; in many cases you have to register that card with your name and phone in order to use the points. Cash or credit, that's tracking you. Until modern social media that -- grocery store membership cards -- were one of the best predictors of age, income, gender, etc. available.

fbdab103 3y ago
That's why you should always check to see if some kind soul has pre-registered [local area code]-867-5309
- jachee 3y ago
  I once used that as my number at Garage Center, then didn’t shop there for ~10 years. When I went back, I’d forgotten. The kid at the register tried looking me up by email, my actual cell number, my previous one, and then finally resorted to *gasp* my actual name. Then, having found me, I asked what number was in there, and he proceeded to read, with exactly zero recognition, <area code> 867-5309, and I just laughed on the outside, and cried a little on the inside.
dahart 3y ago
It’s not the government that concerns me, it’s the corporations. And I don’t think it’s a contest or even matters if cell phones give more data. I’m worried about both.
- caeril 3y ago
  No corporation can point a gun at my head and force me into a steel cage. No matter how evil and corrupt a given corporation is, it could never be as bad as a government.

dahart 3y ago

A friend who worked in credit finance many years ago warned me they were “thinking” (wink wink) about doing things like selling your food purchase history to medical insurance companies for the purposes of declining claims on the basis of long-term bad eating habits. I believe it was and still is illegal, but if corporations are allowed to do this, then they will, and it’s worth it to them. I wouldn’t conflate political shenanigans and things that make the news with systemic forces. Made up things don’t always, or even often, pass muster in court. But true information being lawfully used against you will result in no legal recourse.

frfsfgxffd 3y ago
...this is already legal for some decades. if you are in a rewards program you agreed to have you anonymized sales history (i mean, they will not list "ate burgers" but "ate at fiveguys" is pretty similar). after that you need some magic to deanonymize the anonymized data, but in the 90s plenty of people claimed to do that already. the famous case was infact with health insurance and burgers... but i can't recall any names. edit: in the usa