4 ms·

I have a similar reaction from folks when I don't trust services/devices. Most telling moment was when I refused to upload my license to LinkedIn because I lost

I have a similar reaction from folks when I don't trust services/devices. Most telling moment was when I refused to upload my license to LinkedIn because I lost 2FA (token on phone, phone destroyed). Microsoft assured me they would "delete the license as soon as it was verified". I've written too many software systems for too many companies, and I do not believe them. Of course, they'd outsourced to AU10TIX, which did retain the licenses, and got hacked: https://www.404media.co/id-verification-service-for-tiktok-uber-x-exposed-driver-licenses-au10tix/ https://www.404media.co/id-verification-service-for-tiktok-u... That's from 2024, but we just had a larger breach with IDScan this week. Sorry for the digression, but the common thread is how much to trust these companies, and my conclusion after dealing with them for many years is they will lie, cheat, and steal to get whatever they want. Some paranoia is warranted, I think.

fillskills 1mo ago
Replit was asking for my license to change email address. Jeez
EA-3167 1mo ago
Same here when they find out I’ve never had an FB/IG/X etc account. As though having that crap in your life is somehow mandatory. People who make poor choices love to pretend that they had no choice at all.
- andrepd 1mo ago
  1. Interaction with Meta is virtually mandatory in many places in the world. Try opting out of Meta when your kid's daycare or your building's group chat is on whatsapp. 2. It doesn't really matter if you opt out, because _other people around you don't_: they take pictures in which you show, they tag you, they talk about you, they send you links, etc. Which means they (Meta) build a shadow profile of you anyway. The "personal responsibility angle" is pure fiction.
  - EA-3167 1mo ago
    You’re assuming that my primary concern is my privacy rather than my sanity. I don’t understand how anyone can seek out a non-stop feed of the sort of people who routinely post on FB. I’ve seen exactly what the doom scroll does to people without them realizing it. So yeah if a business requires me to have an account I’ll find a different business to patronize. Frankly if you’re expecting someone other than you to take responsibility for the media you consume, that’s a problem.
  - throw-qqqqq 1mo ago
    My building’s group is on FB. I’ve managed without access for over a decade. I live a somewhat normal adult life and manage without having anything to do with Meta ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I probably miss out on some things, but I don’t notice. All my friends just contact me through other sources. If you have kids, it’s more difficult - I can acknowledge that.
  - what 1mo ago
    You don’t NEED to participate in those group chats.
    - ZPrimed 1mo ago
      outside of the US, whatsapp has a huge chunk of the "private" messaging market. Everything that we usually use SMS or iMessage for, happens via whatsapp in much of Europe and South America.
joquarky 1mo ago
When are the victims going to start getting significantly compensated for these breaches? They will keep happening as long as the consequences are just the cost of doing business.
- toss1 1mo ago
  It will be when enough people elect enough politicians who take action against this weaponized incompetence and strip-mining of the peoples' assets. Or, if that does not happen, when enough people rise up in revolution and take the compensation for themselves. Or, never. If enough people vote enough or revolt enough, they cannot be stopped. But the incentives for too few people rising up are too costly. They work hard to keep the equilibrium in that balance.
- necovek 1mo ago
  It becomes tricky fast. There is obviously a fine that could bankrupt the company: this would be a clear signal "do not do this". There are also many cases where people have been doing everything they should have been, and still got hacked (zero days, for instance). Now, I do not think people should only be slapped on the wrist in that case: it still needs to be significant so companies carefully decide to store only the data they really do need!
- jawilson2 1mo ago
  I want this data to be treated like HIPAA data. Any company that collects personal data must have a compliance officer, and any breaches should lead to people going to jail. If you collect personal data, you are personally responsible for it.
sbarre 1mo ago
> my conclusion after dealing with them for many years is they will lie, cheat, and steal to get whatever they want Honestly, it's not even that extreme in most cases. I think it's usually not malice, it's incompetence. That's why I don't trust big companies with my data. Nothing to do with some CEO's evil plans, but more to do with the hundreds/thousands of mid-level "not my job" or "doing my best" workers who are actually in charge of handling my data.
- computably 1mo ago
  > Nothing to do with some CEO's evil plans, but more to do with the hundreds/thousands of mid-level "not my job" or "doing my best" workers who are actually in charge of handling my data. The CEO is responsible for what their company does. If a major breach can occur through the oversight or "incompetence" of one worker, the CEO has already failed, whether through negligence or malice.
  - paulryanrogers 1mo ago
    Will the CEO suffer consequences? It seems the worst they face is being fired with a golden parachute.
  - ashkankiani 1mo ago
    In China, CEOs go to prison or are executed. Not all the time, but enough. In the US, they are given a golden parachute and make more money at their next posting. There is mostly only failing upwards.
- andrepd 1mo ago
  Pardon my French but bull-fucking-shit! A CEO _should_ take responsibility for what their subordinates do. It's preposterous to simple throw up our arms and say "oh well, some employees were sloppy so we lost some 100 million user IDs and other sensitive information that we promised not to store but we lied. Oopsie, silly me, pardon my wee incompetence tee-hee". No no no NO NO! At some level, and certainly at the level where you get paychecks of 10 million a year for the "huge responsibility you are bearing", then incompetence IS malice!

fillskills 1mo ago

Replit was asking for my license to change email address. Jeez

EA-3167 1mo ago

Same here when they find out I’ve never had an FB/IG/X etc account. As though having that crap in your life is somehow mandatory. People who make poor choices love to pretend that they had no choice at all.

andrepd 1mo ago
1. Interaction with Meta is virtually mandatory in many places in the world. Try opting out of Meta when your kid's daycare or your building's group chat is on whatsapp. 2. It doesn't really matter if you opt out, because _other people around you don't_: they take pictures in which you show, they tag you, they talk about you, they send you links, etc. Which means they (Meta) build a shadow profile of you anyway. The "personal responsibility angle" is pure fiction.
- EA-3167 1mo ago
  You’re assuming that my primary concern is my privacy rather than my sanity. I don’t understand how anyone can seek out a non-stop feed of the sort of people who routinely post on FB. I’ve seen exactly what the doom scroll does to people without them realizing it. So yeah if a business requires me to have an account I’ll find a different business to patronize. Frankly if you’re expecting someone other than you to take responsibility for the media you consume, that’s a problem.
- throw-qqqqq 1mo ago
  My building’s group is on FB. I’ve managed without access for over a decade. I live a somewhat normal adult life and manage without having anything to do with Meta ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I probably miss out on some things, but I don’t notice. All my friends just contact me through other sources. If you have kids, it’s more difficult - I can acknowledge that.
- what 1mo ago
  You don’t NEED to participate in those group chats.
  - ZPrimed 1mo ago
    outside of the US, whatsapp has a huge chunk of the "private" messaging market. Everything that we usually use SMS or iMessage for, happens via whatsapp in much of Europe and South America.

joquarky 1mo ago

When are the victims going to start getting significantly compensated for these breaches? They will keep happening as long as the consequences are just the cost of doing business.

toss1 1mo ago
It will be when enough people elect enough politicians who take action against this weaponized incompetence and strip-mining of the peoples' assets. Or, if that does not happen, when enough people rise up in revolution and take the compensation for themselves. Or, never. If enough people vote enough or revolt enough, they cannot be stopped. But the incentives for too few people rising up are too costly. They work hard to keep the equilibrium in that balance.
necovek 1mo ago
It becomes tricky fast. There is obviously a fine that could bankrupt the company: this would be a clear signal "do not do this". There are also many cases where people have been doing everything they should have been, and still got hacked (zero days, for instance). Now, I do not think people should only be slapped on the wrist in that case: it still needs to be significant so companies carefully decide to store only the data they really do need!
jawilson2 1mo ago
I want this data to be treated like HIPAA data. Any company that collects personal data must have a compliance officer, and any breaches should lead to people going to jail. If you collect personal data, you are personally responsible for it.

sbarre 1mo ago

> my conclusion after dealing with them for many years is they will lie, cheat, and steal to get whatever they want Honestly, it's not even that extreme in most cases. I think it's usually not malice, it's incompetence. That's why I don't trust big companies with my data. Nothing to do with some CEO's evil plans, but more to do with the hundreds/thousands of mid-level "not my job" or "doing my best" workers who are actually in charge of handling my data.

computably 1mo ago
> Nothing to do with some CEO's evil plans, but more to do with the hundreds/thousands of mid-level "not my job" or "doing my best" workers who are actually in charge of handling my data. The CEO is responsible for what their company does. If a major breach can occur through the oversight or "incompetence" of one worker, the CEO has already failed, whether through negligence or malice.
- paulryanrogers 1mo ago
  Will the CEO suffer consequences? It seems the worst they face is being fired with a golden parachute.
- ashkankiani 1mo ago
  In China, CEOs go to prison or are executed. Not all the time, but enough. In the US, they are given a golden parachute and make more money at their next posting. There is mostly only failing upwards.
andrepd 1mo ago
Pardon my French but bull-fucking-shit! A CEO _should_ take responsibility for what their subordinates do. It's preposterous to simple throw up our arms and say "oh well, some employees were sloppy so we lost some 100 million user IDs and other sensitive information that we promised not to store but we lied. Oopsie, silly me, pardon my wee incompetence tee-hee". No no no NO NO! At some level, and certainly at the level where you get paychecks of 10 million a year for the "huge responsibility you are bearing", then incompetence IS malice!