2 ms·

> we can just refuse to buy Fords. I'm trying to think back to a situation where a product was shipped with something intrusive like this and customers didn't

> we can just refuse to buy Fords. I'm trying to think back to a situation where a product was shipped with something intrusive like this and customers didn't buy it. Can you help?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> trying to think back to a situation where a product was shipped with something intrusive like this and customers didn't buy it There aren’t many because most consumers don’t particularly value privacy. They presumably wouldn’t mind this. It’s only a problem for us if there is no choice in the market, or their choices have a negative externality on us.
- ericd 2y ago
  Do you think we might see the same sort of bifurcation in the car market that we’ve seen in many other markets, as peoples’ wealth has gone more bimodal? Really cheaply made/total junk with relatively little variation, and premium priced, small volume goods marketed to the upper middle and above.
  - mattmaroon 2y ago
    Isn’t that what we’ve seen for like 100 years? There’s Kia and Lexus and all sorts of stuff in between.
  - skyyler 2y ago
    haves vs have-nots working class or owning class it really does seem like it’s going that direction, doesn’t it?
virtue3 2y ago
Your smartphone Anything by meta Amazon Alexa/dot All smart-tvs are uploading your screen and what you watch constantly. Source: I worked on adding interactivity to ads on certain TVs when they used content recognition on your sceeen caps
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  I'm confused, those are wildly successful products bought by millions of customers.
- daelon 2y ago
  He said DIDN'T buy it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bee_rider 2y ago
I think Google Glass and Facebook’s camera sunglasses didn’t work out over privacy concerns. Or maybe they didn’t work out because they were useless, IDK. In general, I think it is hard to think, especially off the cuff, of examples of products that didn’t work out.
- thimabi 2y ago
  IMO these glasses did not work out because of privacy concerns or lack of usefulness, but rather because many felt “dorky” and attracted unwanted attention when wearing them.
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    The devices I listed slightly miss the mark, they aren’t exactly what the first comment was about (products that violate the purchaser’s privacy be products that violate the privacy of everyone that happens to be around them). Still though, I think this is part of how the general public experiences privacy violations. Not from some opsec or cryptography point of view. But because privacy violation devices are dorky and attract unwanted attention. They are dorky, because cool, fun things are often illegal or at least you don’t want them recorded and posted to Facebook for your extended family and employers to see. They attract unwanted attention because nobody wants that.

> we can just refuse to buy Fords. I'm trying to think back to a situation where a product was shipped with something intrusive like this and customers didn't buy it. Can you help?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> trying to think back to a situation where a product was shipped with something intrusive like this and customers didn't buy it There aren’t many because most consumers don’t particularly value privacy. They presumably wouldn’t mind this. It’s only a problem for us if there is no choice in the market, or their choices have a negative externality on us.

ericd 2y ago
Do you think we might see the same sort of bifurcation in the car market that we’ve seen in many other markets, as peoples’ wealth has gone more bimodal? Really cheaply made/total junk with relatively little variation, and premium priced, small volume goods marketed to the upper middle and above.
- mattmaroon 2y ago
  Isn’t that what we’ve seen for like 100 years? There’s Kia and Lexus and all sorts of stuff in between.
- skyyler 2y ago
  haves vs have-nots working class or owning class it really does seem like it’s going that direction, doesn’t it?

virtue3 2y ago

Your smartphone Anything by meta Amazon Alexa/dot All smart-tvs are uploading your screen and what you watch constantly. Source: I worked on adding interactivity to ads on certain TVs when they used content recognition on your sceeen caps

kelseyfrog 2y ago
I'm confused, those are wildly successful products bought by millions of customers.
daelon 2y ago
He said DIDN'T buy it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

bee_rider 2y ago

I think Google Glass and Facebook’s camera sunglasses didn’t work out over privacy concerns. Or maybe they didn’t work out because they were useless, IDK. In general, I think it is hard to think, especially off the cuff, of examples of products that didn’t work out.

thimabi 2y ago
IMO these glasses did not work out because of privacy concerns or lack of usefulness, but rather because many felt “dorky” and attracted unwanted attention when wearing them.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  The devices I listed slightly miss the mark, they aren’t exactly what the first comment was about (products that violate the purchaser’s privacy be products that violate the privacy of everyone that happens to be around them). Still though, I think this is part of how the general public experiences privacy violations. Not from some opsec or cryptography point of view. But because privacy violation devices are dorky and attract unwanted attention. They are dorky, because cool, fun things are often illegal or at least you don’t want them recorded and posted to Facebook for your extended family and employers to see. They attract unwanted attention because nobody wants that.