5 ms·

Honestly, I kind of prefer the new AT&T solution where they charge you ~$30 more to do nothing with your data. If paranoid people want this, then by all means,

by lnanek2 12y ago

Honestly, I kind of prefer the new AT&T solution where they charge you ~$30 more to do nothing with your data. If paranoid people want this, then by all means, let them pay for it.

TruthWillFree 12y ago
You trust them? How do you know this just makes you more suspicious and gives them more of an illogical basis for placing you under increased surveillance.
- fixermark 12y ago
  Sure I trust them. The moment it's discovered that they've failed to hold up their end of the bargain, they're out $30 x some significant percentage of the users of that service per month. That's not chump change (to say nothing of the potential class action lawsuit for utterly failing to hold up a contract while continuing to charge customers for the services stipulated in said contract).
  - TruthWillFree 12y ago
    We assume that we are entitled to some sort of protection because we've paid for a service, but that didn't stop these companies from unlawfully participating or turning a blind eye to unwarranted and unrestrained violations of privacy. If you believe some court centered process will protect you from abuse you are sadly mistaken. Of course it is no issue until the fascists come after you....
  - Retra 12y ago
    You are assuming there is a meaningful contract to uphold. So I ask you this: what exactly do you think you are buying from them?
hackuser 12y ago
* Should privacy only be available to people who can afford $360/yr? * What good is confidentiality on AT&T, when everyone else still is tracking you (websites, cellular provider, electric utility, car manufacturer, CCTV operators, etc.). * Should privacy require you to pay every one of those businesses $360/year? Also, AT&T easily could buy the the information they are forgoing from a third party, and for much less than $360/year/customer.
pikzen 12y ago
>paranoid Is it really paranoïa when this is already the case ? Google's entire business is based around getting your data and selling it to advertisers. More and more startups and companies offer a "free" service in exchange for your personal data which they sell back. Hekl, half of HN probably already works in a startup whose business model is exactly that. You have absolutely no say in how your data gets used. You also have no guarantee that AT&T actually respect your choice. Sorry for not being OK with my personal information getting passed through fifty servers around the world for various advertising companies. In the case of AT&T it's even worse because they have a monopoly on the medium: you don't get to choose where your data passes through when calling someone. At least Internet allows people to run µMatrix, RequestPolicy and others, limiting the amount that gets sent through.
- rhino369 12y ago
  The paranoia is the fear that the data about you will actually cause you a non-trivial harm.

by lnanek2 12y ago

Honestly, I kind of prefer the new AT&T solution where they charge you ~$30 more to do nothing with your data. If paranoid people want this, then by all means, let them pay for it.

TruthWillFree 12y ago

You trust them? How do you know this just makes you more suspicious and gives them more of an illogical basis for placing you under increased surveillance.

fixermark 12y ago
Sure I trust them. The moment it's discovered that they've failed to hold up their end of the bargain, they're out $30 x some significant percentage of the users of that service per month. That's not chump change (to say nothing of the potential class action lawsuit for utterly failing to hold up a contract while continuing to charge customers for the services stipulated in said contract).
- TruthWillFree 12y ago
  We assume that we are entitled to some sort of protection because we've paid for a service, but that didn't stop these companies from unlawfully participating or turning a blind eye to unwarranted and unrestrained violations of privacy. If you believe some court centered process will protect you from abuse you are sadly mistaken. Of course it is no issue until the fascists come after you....
- Retra 12y ago
  You are assuming there is a meaningful contract to uphold. So I ask you this: what exactly do you think you are buying from them?

hackuser 12y ago

* Should privacy only be available to people who can afford $360/yr? * What good is confidentiality on AT&T, when everyone else still is tracking you (websites, cellular provider, electric utility, car manufacturer, CCTV operators, etc.). * Should privacy require you to pay every one of those businesses $360/year? Also, AT&T easily could buy the the information they are forgoing from a third party, and for much less than $360/year/customer.

pikzen 12y ago

>paranoid Is it really paranoïa when this is already the case ? Google's entire business is based around getting your data and selling it to advertisers. More and more startups and companies offer a "free" service in exchange for your personal data which they sell back. Hekl, half of HN probably already works in a startup whose business model is exactly that. You have absolutely no say in how your data gets used. You also have no guarantee that AT&T actually respect your choice. Sorry for not being OK with my personal information getting passed through fifty servers around the world for various advertising companies. In the case of AT&T it's even worse because they have a monopoly on the medium: you don't get to choose where your data passes through when calling someone. At least Internet allows people to run µMatrix, RequestPolicy and others, limiting the amount that gets sent through.

rhino369 12y ago
The paranoia is the fear that the data about you will actually cause you a non-trivial harm.