4 ms·

People must understand that every interaction with an Internet service means voluntarily sending your data to them. These companies don't just "vacuum it up", t

People must understand that every interaction with an Internet service means voluntarily sending your data to them. These companies don't just "vacuum it up", the data is simply sent directly to them. Maybe you don't see it that way, but that is why the perception needs to change. When you use Gmail you are sending your mail to Google, first, and then it is relayed to the recipients. When you search for driving directions to an address, you are sending data to Google that says "I want to know how to drive/cycle/walk to X location right now". When you search for some phrase you are sending a request to Google that says "I want to know about this". There is no reason why they wouldn't hold onto that data. You sent it to them, because you want the response that they can provide. It's an exchange.

nullc 13y ago
> People your you you you your you you you they You them you they People who do not understand technology to the depth and detail that you do are not halfwits or children. They know what they intend to accomplish and giving up their most personal information for perpetual archival is seldom a property they are asking for. If the technological tools they possess do not faithfully obey their intentions with a minimum of unintended side effects then the problem is with the technology or the services not the user. Technology is neat and important, but it exists to serve the user. Faithfulness to the users needs and intentions are the only criteria by which we can judge technology.
- jcromartie 13y ago
  Putting users' needs first is a great ideal, but ultimately any exchange with a company in a private market context is an economic one. I don't think anybody is an idiot just because they don't understand this. They've come to see Internet services as something like public utilities. There is very little to reinforce the idea that you are indeed giving the provider something for the service, since what you are giving is invisible/intangible.

nullc 13y ago

> People your you you you your you you you they You them you they People who do not understand technology to the depth and detail that you do are not halfwits or children. They know what they intend to accomplish and giving up their most personal information for perpetual archival is seldom a property they are asking for. If the technological tools they possess do not faithfully obey their intentions with a minimum of unintended side effects then the problem is with the technology or the services not the user. Technology is neat and important, but it exists to serve the user. Faithfulness to the users needs and intentions are the only criteria by which we can judge technology.

jcromartie 13y ago
Putting users' needs first is a great ideal, but ultimately any exchange with a company in a private market context is an economic one. I don't think anybody is an idiot just because they don't understand this. They've come to see Internet services as something like public utilities. There is very little to reinforce the idea that you are indeed giving the provider something for the service, since what you are giving is invisible/intangible.