3 ms·

I don't like the word "share" in this context: these financial companies didn't simply give away info, they got something in return and I would like more info a

• kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
  Data miners pay for any and all profiling data that they can add to their panopticon. All the better to send you targeted ads.
  • pierat 3y ago
    If you think its JUST ads, boy, do I have a bridge to sell you. 1. Data sold to Natsec/FBI/CIA/NSA etc 2. Data sold to IRS 3. Data sold to state tax authority 4. Data sold to police agencies 5. Data sold to *churches* ( https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/catholic-group-buying-data-to-out-gay-priests ) "If you give me six datapoints generated by the devices of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." ... to bastardize Cardinal Richelieu's quote
    • ta988 3y ago
      And everybody working for ad companies is complicit.
• marketingtech 3y ago
  The financial companies got higher performing ads delivered to the right people, as well as the ability to measure the actions taken from the ads. In exchange, they gave away your data for free. Every company running ads on the internet is making this value exchange, but these financial companies screwed up by pouring protected data into Google's and Meta's dumb pipes.
  • Xelbair 3y ago
    >The financial companies got higher performing ads delivered to the right people, as well as the ability to measure the actions taken from the ads. In exchange, they gave away your data for free. It seems like we have a name for such transaction. Where one party gives something to get something else from second party. It's called sale. Not sharing.
    • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > It seems like we have a name for such transaction. Where one party gives something to get something else from second party We also have words for one party giving something that doesn't belong to them, or which they are not entitled to give. They're somewhere between embezzlement and theft.
    • Closi 3y ago
      Well the definition of a sale is usually the exchange of a commodity for money. When its information that can be copied it would usually be called sharing (because both parties still have what they started with, but both have 'more' as they have shared with the other). If you are arguing semantics, sale is probably the wrong term and 'sharing' is probably more accurate.
      • JohnFen 3y ago
        > Well the definition of a sale is usually the exchange of a commodity for money. I thought the definition of "sale" is the exchange of a thing for consideration. The consideration is usually money, but doesn't have to be. But I had to look it up. My definition was a bit too expansive, but not by much. The first one in the American Heritage dictionary is The exchange of goods or services for an amount of money or its equivalent; the act of selling. > If you are arguing semantics, sale is probably the wrong term and 'sharing' is probably more accurate. I think "sharing" is less accurate. Maximal pedantic accuracy is probably "bartered".
        • Closi 3y ago
          Well the definition of sharing would be "to have or use something at the same time as someone else", so as you both have access to the data after the action and can both use it at the same time, I think sharing could be considered valid alongside bartered. The one that isn't accurate though would be sale, which is an exchange for money.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• Calvin02 3y ago
  They are using the ads retargeting pixel to retarget ads. You are either deliberately making it sound more nefarious than it is or you didn’t read the article.
  • JohnFen 3y ago
    Using retargeting pixels is pretty nefarious.