4 ms·

You're not wrong, but I'd argue there's some gulf between using personal data to show people banner ads for overpriced sneakers and using personal data to help

You're not wrong, but I'd argue there's some gulf between using personal data to show people banner ads for overpriced sneakers and using personal data to help law enforcement throw people in jail. You could certainly do the former but draw the line at the latter. With the former it's less about the outcome—seeing obnoxious Nike ads on the internet—and more about the principle of not wanting your data to be collected, even if nothing nefarious ever comes of it. With the latter you're seeing that worst case scenario come to life.

pydry 3y ago
If argue that there isnt that much of a gulf. It's a bit further down a slippery slope. I'd also argue that ideals in Silicon Valley are, cultrually, fully subordinated to money anyway so... it's probably a moot point how much of a gulf there is.
- spondylosaurus 3y ago
  Hard agree re. money and ideals. I guess what I'd counter is that someone with a pinch of integrity (so not the current incarnation of SV lol) could absolutely build a business from questionable data practices without going whole hog into narc-dom. Like how a casino can be predatory in its own right without also funneling money into the mob.
ramraj07 3y ago
Are you saying Google and Meta don’t provide your personal information to law enforcement? Last I checked they do that whenever they’re asked to and to great levels of success (especially the list of all phones that were found within the area of a crime).
- spondylosaurus 3y ago
  They definitely do, but there's a difference between being subpoenaed (i.e., forced to comply) and deliberately choosing to work with LE because it's profitable to you. A cop can force me to show him my emails or text messages, but that doesn't mean I want to or that I'm making money any off of it. On the other hand, if I offer to let them read my emails for the low price of $10... And literally anyone can be subpoenaed in the same fashion—FB and Google aren't unique in that regard. LE could subpoena the guy who runs your local deli and force him to hand over a list of every customer who came in on a certain day.

pydry 3y ago

If argue that there isnt that much of a gulf. It's a bit further down a slippery slope. I'd also argue that ideals in Silicon Valley are, cultrually, fully subordinated to money anyway so... it's probably a moot point how much of a gulf there is.

spondylosaurus 3y ago
Hard agree re. money and ideals. I guess what I'd counter is that someone with a pinch of integrity (so not the current incarnation of SV lol) could absolutely build a business from questionable data practices without going whole hog into narc-dom. Like how a casino can be predatory in its own right without also funneling money into the mob.

ramraj07 3y ago

Are you saying Google and Meta don’t provide your personal information to law enforcement? Last I checked they do that whenever they’re asked to and to great levels of success (especially the list of all phones that were found within the area of a crime).

spondylosaurus 3y ago
They definitely do, but there's a difference between being subpoenaed (i.e., forced to comply) and deliberately choosing to work with LE because it's profitable to you. A cop can force me to show him my emails or text messages, but that doesn't mean I want to or that I'm making money any off of it. On the other hand, if I offer to let them read my emails for the low price of $10... And literally anyone can be subpoenaed in the same fashion—FB and Google aren't unique in that regard. LE could subpoena the guy who runs your local deli and force him to hand over a list of every customer who came in on a certain day.