3 ms·

"Ugly" "sneaky" "disturbing" "unsettling". The article's author made quite an effort to present a a long-established (and relatively harmless) practice as a hor

"Ugly" "sneaky" "disturbing" "unsettling". The article's author made quite an effort to present a a long-established (and relatively harmless) practice as a horrible thing. What is funny in the era of really disturbing practices in invading our privacy.

mike-cardwell 12y ago
If companies sent letters, which when opened, silently and without your knowledge sent a signal home to tell them that the letter delivered to your house had just been opened, would that be "harmless"? Personally, I would consider it, ugly, sneaky, disturbing and unsettling. But then it's ok on the Internet because this sort of tracking is easy on the Internet right?
- ArekDymalski 12y ago
  Let's stretch the analogy a bit further. If the company representative is talking to me face to face and watching my reactions (Do I hear? Do I understand?) is that unsettling? Do people cover their faces when they are in a shop/bank? No, it's a natural part of the communication. Email is just a form of communication. I believe, ut's not that harmless that someone received the confirmation that his message was opened. Of course things get a bit complicated when someone gets too much information, but simple opening emails/clicking links is something we should accept. When we are walking down the street hundreds of people see us, see what we do. Most people do not have a problem with that. I really can't understand what is so different in case of online activity, despite the fact that we are familiar with other people seeing us in real world and the Interent is still a mentally new territory for us. And this distinction between the off- and online privacy is something what actually can inhibit the development of online society imho.
  - mike-cardwell 12y ago
    This is all down to what the user expects. When the user is having a face to face conversation with somebody, they expect and accept that person will be able to look at them and note their facial expressions and what they're saying. When somebody is sat at home opening a letter or an email, they don't expect the sender to know that they're doing it. Yes, many geeks understand that the sender will be able to see that they're doing it, but the average non-geek does not understand this.
    - ArekDymalski 12y ago
      Yes, you're absolutely right. However, I believe that the proper direction is to change the people's expectations towards "I'm aware that typical consumer technology doesn't offer me anonymity, just like I can't expect to be anonymous/invisible on the street with typical behavior" instead of luring them into the illusion that the internet is some completely separate world.Off- and on-line will interweave more and more and society should adjust their expectations accordingly.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

mike-cardwell 12y ago

If companies sent letters, which when opened, silently and without your knowledge sent a signal home to tell them that the letter delivered to your house had just been opened, would that be "harmless"? Personally, I would consider it, ugly, sneaky, disturbing and unsettling. But then it's ok on the Internet because this sort of tracking is easy on the Internet right?

ArekDymalski 12y ago
Let's stretch the analogy a bit further. If the company representative is talking to me face to face and watching my reactions (Do I hear? Do I understand?) is that unsettling? Do people cover their faces when they are in a shop/bank? No, it's a natural part of the communication. Email is just a form of communication. I believe, ut's not that harmless that someone received the confirmation that his message was opened. Of course things get a bit complicated when someone gets too much information, but simple opening emails/clicking links is something we should accept. When we are walking down the street hundreds of people see us, see what we do. Most people do not have a problem with that. I really can't understand what is so different in case of online activity, despite the fact that we are familiar with other people seeing us in real world and the Interent is still a mentally new territory for us. And this distinction between the off- and online privacy is something what actually can inhibit the development of online society imho.
- mike-cardwell 12y ago
  This is all down to what the user expects. When the user is having a face to face conversation with somebody, they expect and accept that person will be able to look at them and note their facial expressions and what they're saying. When somebody is sat at home opening a letter or an email, they don't expect the sender to know that they're doing it. Yes, many geeks understand that the sender will be able to see that they're doing it, but the average non-geek does not understand this.
  - ArekDymalski 12y ago
    Yes, you're absolutely right. However, I believe that the proper direction is to change the people's expectations towards "I'm aware that typical consumer technology doesn't offer me anonymity, just like I can't expect to be anonymous/invisible on the street with typical behavior" instead of luring them into the illusion that the internet is some completely separate world.Off- and on-line will interweave more and more and society should adjust their expectations accordingly.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]