4 ms·

Google/Facebook don't have to sell your info to advertisers because the are advertisers. Either way it is used for commercial advantage.

mike_hearn 12y ago
Yes, but so what? Would you prefer everyone had to pay for their services, meaning a) You need a credit card, excluding large chunks of the world population that doesn't have one b) Google/FB learn your real identity via the payment networks, verified to banking level I get that advertising is annoying. Regardless, painting it as some kind of scary privacy problem doesn't make sense and worse, muddies the water. People end up dumping tech companies into the same boat as governments even though they have hardly anything in common.
- throwawayaway 12y ago
  It's more than annoying. It is a privacy problem. I would prefer people run their own services, decentralised. The tech companies are useful idiots.
  - robertfw 12y ago
    I think that we will get there eventually, but there is still plenty of work to be done - for it to work it needs to be mass market, which means it needs to Just Work. One project I've been meaning to delve into is https://sandstorm.io/ https://sandstorm.io/
- tracker1 12y ago
  It's pretty creepy, when I look at a product on Amazon, and see SOME_PERSON that I follow on facebook/twitter posted a review of this item fairly prominently. I've never attached my twitter profile, or facebook profile to Amazon, but there it is/was. That's pretty damned creepy.
- Omniusaspirer 12y ago
  I think it's outright dishonest to paint advertising as not a privacy problem. It's a huge portion of why ones every online movement is tracked in the first place. Google's entire gimmick is that they're better at stalking people than any other tech company on the planet, without "targeted" advertising they'd have long been irrelevant. Also, claiming you need a credit card to do things online is a great example of "not making sense and muddying the water". If Google/FB charged for their services there's still no reason they would need my address or any other identifying information- it's not like they're sending boxes to my door. On your last point; Tech companies and governments get put in the same boat for good reason- they actively work together on a regular basis. Even if the company is "compelled" to give the info- that's still only an issue because the companies are whoring and storing all the data they can get their hands on (for indefinite amounts of time).
declan 12y ago
Google and Facebook offer platforms to advertisers. For instance, Facebook lets advertisers show ads to users of age X, working at company Y, in location Z, etc. (without disclosing their identities). This is completely different from selling your information, and the companies' privacy policies and practices reflect this. As mike_hearn says, these sorts of alarmist claims ("they're selling your info!") are easily debunked. And in this case they detract from the rest of Julian's essay, which is a shame because elsewhere he makes some good points.

mike_hearn 12y ago

Yes, but so what? Would you prefer everyone had to pay for their services, meaning a) You need a credit card, excluding large chunks of the world population that doesn't have one b) Google/FB learn your real identity via the payment networks, verified to banking level I get that advertising is annoying. Regardless, painting it as some kind of scary privacy problem doesn't make sense and worse, muddies the water. People end up dumping tech companies into the same boat as governments even though they have hardly anything in common.

throwawayaway 12y ago
It's more than annoying. It is a privacy problem. I would prefer people run their own services, decentralised. The tech companies are useful idiots.
- robertfw 12y ago
  I think that we will get there eventually, but there is still plenty of work to be done - for it to work it needs to be mass market, which means it needs to Just Work. One project I've been meaning to delve into is https://sandstorm.io/ https://sandstorm.io/
tracker1 12y ago
It's pretty creepy, when I look at a product on Amazon, and see SOME_PERSON that I follow on facebook/twitter posted a review of this item fairly prominently. I've never attached my twitter profile, or facebook profile to Amazon, but there it is/was. That's pretty damned creepy.
Omniusaspirer 12y ago
I think it's outright dishonest to paint advertising as not a privacy problem. It's a huge portion of why ones every online movement is tracked in the first place. Google's entire gimmick is that they're better at stalking people than any other tech company on the planet, without "targeted" advertising they'd have long been irrelevant. Also, claiming you need a credit card to do things online is a great example of "not making sense and muddying the water". If Google/FB charged for their services there's still no reason they would need my address or any other identifying information- it's not like they're sending boxes to my door. On your last point; Tech companies and governments get put in the same boat for good reason- they actively work together on a regular basis. Even if the company is "compelled" to give the info- that's still only an issue because the companies are whoring and storing all the data they can get their hands on (for indefinite amounts of time).

declan 12y ago

Google and Facebook offer platforms to advertisers. For instance, Facebook lets advertisers show ads to users of age X, working at company Y, in location Z, etc. (without disclosing their identities). This is completely different from selling your information, and the companies' privacy policies and practices reflect this. As mike_hearn says, these sorts of alarmist claims ("they're selling your info!") are easily debunked. And in this case they detract from the rest of Julian's essay, which is a shame because elsewhere he makes some good points.