5 ms·
The tech world is really becoming a surveillance nightmare. Always for the same dubious straw men reasons of terrorism and co, they want to control everyone. L
by greatgib 3y ago
The tech world is really becoming a surveillance nightmare.
Always for the same dubious straw men reasons of terrorism and co, they want to control everyone. Like for banks, the excuse is to ensure that no forbidden foreign actor is allowed the use of the service , but just for that the billion legitimate users will all have to provide their complete justificative info, IPs, and support documents to later be used by the org or gov for whatever reason they will want once they will have them.
Like for banks.
Imagine if the same thing was requested in the real world, like forced to prove your identity when you take gas, When you buy a computer, when you buy a condom.
- tiznow 3y agoalways_has_been.jpg
- pessimizer 3y ago> The tech world is really becoming a surveillance nightmare. Most definitely was not.
- forgetfreeman 3y ago30 years ago maybe.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- api 3y agoThe strongest incentives for surveillance are actually in the private sector: the need for internal KPIs, selling data, targeted advertising, product and sales funnel optimization, and now AI training data. The government pushes surveillance too but in my experience it’s the secondary driver, at least in the US. Might be different in other countries. I’m really pessimistic about privacy online given that every single incentive both public and private encourages maximum privacy invasion and centralization. I mean every single incentive. It’s almost impossible to resist. We might have a chance if end users cared enough to pay for privacy and avoid things that invade it, but very few do. Most people care about convenience, features, and cost, and that’s it. Nothing else matters.
- int_19h 3y agoIt's not that people don't care about privacy tbh. But they do indeed care about convenience, so when they're presented with the artificially created choice of corporate surveillance hell vs privacy-enabling options that are by and large put together by a few enthusiasts with meager resources, it's no surprise what the end result is. But make no mistake - we could, as a society, invest heavily in developing privacy-first platforms and software, and have it all. I can't even say that we choose not to; it's more that representative democracy is not particularly representative in practice, and mostly works as a form of veto.
- TheDong 3y agoI don't think the choice is "surveillance vs privacy", but rather "free-with-ads" vs "paid-with-privacy" People choose to watch youtube with ads rather than pay for youtube premium without ads. People buy the kindle with ads on the lockscreen over paying $20 or whatever more for an ad-free one. When given the choice of a $3 app store app with no ads vs an identical free one with ads, users pick the ads. Picking ads is effectively the same as choosing a lower price (free) over privacy, and people seem to consistently pick in this direction. Because of that, I don't think it's fair to say that users aren't actually making any choice here. Users are choosing free services over privacy.
- int_19h 3y agoPeople pick ads, it is true. They do not explicitly pick "track you everywhere to build a hyper-accurate profile of you that can then push precisely tuned ads at you", though. That part is buried in the EULAs.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- slavik81 3y agoYou cannot buy privacy with a credit card. You tie your identity to an account when you pay for it. Ads are orthogonal to privacy. We've had privacy-preserving ads in physical newspapers for hundreds of years. There is no reasonable way for a normal person to consistently choose privacy these days.
- rodgerd 3y ago> The tech world is really becoming a surveillance nightmare. Becoming? Stalkerware, data brokers selling women's information to the Gilead apparatus, Palantir... none of this is new, and present much greater threats on a day to day basis than this.
- threeseed 3y agoKYC/AML is not some made up concept in order to further some conspiracy. There is genuine harm caused by money laundering and the fraudulent use of the financial system by bad actors. Likewise anonymous use of shared infrastructure is a central part of the scam/spam/malware ecosystem which costs the global economy $10+ trillion a year. At some point given the impacts to the most vulnerable in society we need to simply ask that people prove who they are.
- AmericanChopper 3y agoKYC and AML do very little to actually address any risks related to money laundering. But they’re very powerful tools that banks use to push their customers around and control how they use their money (somehow usually in ways that benefit the banks of course).
- nine_k 3y agoCould you offer a few examples of such limitations which banks impose, and how it benefits them?
- brunblanc 3y ago1) Float. Every dollar that is held in limbo 'for checking' is interest income to the bank. 2) Rabid identification requirements lower the risk of new account fraud (which is paid by the bank). 3) Information on who you're sending payments to is usable by the bank for prospecting and risk analysis. 4) If you read anything about regulatory capture, it explains how regulation is used by incumbents to discourage competition. i.e. No new banks have opened in the U.S. since 2009, when new regulations to prevent banks from getting bigger were passed. <- And now, the biggest banks are MUCH larger.
- threeseed 3y ago> No new banks have opened in the U.S. since 2009 From 2009 to 2013 only 7 new banks were formed, fewer than 2 per year. Many industry observers have suggested that the decline is primarily due to regulatory burden, including new FDIC regulations and the 2010 Dodd‐Frank Act. But other influences could have played a role, in particular, the current weak economy. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/feds/2014/files/2014113pap.pdf https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/feds/2014/files/2...
- walterbell 3y agohttps://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/09/3-count-felon-jpmorgan-chase-caught-laundering-more-dirty-money/ https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/09/3-count-felon-jpmorga... > ... secret documents leaked from FinCEN, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a unit of the U.S. Treasury. The documents “show that five global banks — JPMorgan, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank and Bank of New York Mellon — kept profiting from powerful and dangerous players even after U.S. authorities fined these financial institutions for earlier failures to stem flows of dirty money.” https://insightcrime.org/news/chinese-money-launderers-mexico-cartels-move-millions-secret/ https://insightcrime.org/news/chinese-money-launderers-mexic... > While the involvement of Chinese money-laundering rings in handling drug proceeds from Mexico is nothing new, a number of recent court cases in the United States have revealed crucial information about how these schemes work ... weekly pick-ups from representatives of Mexican criminal groups, made in cash ranging between $150,000 and $1 million, with an average of $500,000. These were made in large cities including Chicago, New York and Atlanta ... network of Chinese-owned businesses in the United States and Mexico ... transfer a correspondent amount of money through Chinese banking apps. This happened entirely through the Asian country’s domestic banking system ... “It’s the most sophisticated form of money laundering that’s ever existed,” one of the US sources told Reuters. Netflix series, "The Laundromat", https://youtube.com/watch?v=wuBRcfe4bSo https://youtube.com/watch?v=wuBRcfe4bSo
- hnburnsy 3y agoAnd yet my super regional bank will only allow me, a customer of over 20 years, to ACH $5000 per day or $25000 per month. I read that Citibank has ACH limits of $2000/$10000.
- simfree 3y agoThere are credit unions with higher Zelle limits, nevermind actual ACH limits. Switch to a credit union that values your business, they are much more motivated to hook you up with high ACH limits, and I've repeatedly seen them issue loans at rates well below market.
- 3y ago
- brikym 3y agoOne of the leaders in dystopian social engineering, the United Kingdom, wants a KYC for watching porn so you're not far off. Oi mate you can't do that without a loicence!
- markdown 3y agoI mean they already have it for public transport. They don't allow cash, so they can track your movements everywhere.
- fragmede 3y agoNo need to look across the pond, Louisiana and Utah both require id checks to watch porn.
- mysteria 3y agoAnd soon you may need one for regular old Twitter and Facebook since we want to keep the kids safe right?
- marcinzm 3y ago> Imagine if the same thing was requested in the real world, like forced to prove your identity when you take gas, When you buy a computer, when you buy a condom. There's no need, there's fifty security cameras and phone trackers already doing it that may not even require a warrant to access.
- lettergram 3y agoWhat do you think central bank digital currencies are about? They can tie your identity to your wallet. Then you have to validate your identity to access the wallet. (There’s worse stuff, like they could decide only 10% of your budget can be used on gas. Or force you to pay higher taxes as a carbon credit, etc etc)
- RabbiNoseberg 3y ago[dead]
- lamontcg 3y agoThis also looks like more moat and regulatory capture for existing IAAS providers.