Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

news.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 264 posts

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#51

Post by vbuwivbiu »

grondilu wrote: post #39

Can someone explain to me why this so-called "privacy" is such a big deal on internet? Can't internet, or at least a major part of it, be considered a public place? I mean, when I walk in the street, I do not wear a mask (I suspect that'd be illegal in my country), yet I do not worry about someone using surveillance cameras to track all my activities. Sure, it could technically be done but I'm not that important : no…

ok go ahead and publish all your email, chat messages and bank account details here now

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#52

Post by pmoriarty »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #14
benbenolson wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is a good reason to have some sort of technocracy element to the federal government. I lean extremely far right, but in this case, this seems like one of the few things that the federal government should be doing-- breaking up stout monopolies that can't be competed with. I'm unfamiliar with the decision, but why split up a company like Microsoft in 1999, but leave Facebook and Google alone?

It's not against the law to have a monopoly - it's against the law to exploit having a monopoly to enter another market. Microsoft was seen to be exploiting it's consumer OS market share to gain a monopoly in the browser market and the productivity software market, AIUI.

"It's not against the law to have a monopoly - it's against the law to exploit having a monopoly to enter another market."

What about the breakup of Ma Bell?

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#53

Post by eeZah7Ux »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #40
benbenolson wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is a good reason to have some sort of technocracy element to the federal government. I lean extremely far right, but in this case, this seems like one of the few things that the federal government should be doing-- breaking up stout monopolies that can't be competed with. I'm unfamiliar with the decision, but why split up a company like Microsoft in 1999, but leave Facebook and Google alone?

"I lean extremely far right, but in this case, this seems like one of the few things that the federal government should be doing-- breaking up stout monopolies that can't be competed with." Doesn't sound like you are far right at all then. I'm wondering if we're actually a good judge of our own political leaning. I think that I'm libertarian (little 'l'), but Facebook ad policy thinks I'm far left . Maybe Facebook kn…

Spot on.

The test at https://www.politicalcompass.org/ works reasonably well.

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#55

Post by tomc1985 »

grondilu wrote: post #39

Can someone explain to me why this so-called "privacy" is such a big deal on internet? Can't internet, or at least a major part of it, be considered a public place? I mean, when I walk in the street, I do not wear a mask (I suspect that'd be illegal in my country), yet I do not worry about someone using surveillance cameras to track all my activities. Sure, it could technically be done but I'm not that important : no…

Out in the real world you are seen but most are quickly forgotten. On the internet you are seen and it is logged for an eternity.

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#56

Post by grondilu »

vbuwivbiu wrote: post #51
grondilu wrote: post #39

Can someone explain to me why this so-called "privacy" is such a big deal on internet? Can't internet, or at least a major part of it, be considered a public place? I mean, when I walk in the street, I do not wear a mask (I suspect that'd be illegal in my country), yet I do not worry about someone using surveillance cameras to track all my activities. Sure, it could technically be done but I'm not that important : no…

ok go ahead and publish all your email, chat messages and bank account details here now

Continuing with my analogy that would be like shouting my name and address in the street. Why would I do that?

My point is that I tend to consider myself as anonymous on the internet because I believe nobody is interested enough in me to bother gathering the data. Or if it's done, it's a robot that does it for statistical purpose[1]. No human cares.

But if I publish personal infos in plain text, like email, phone number and stuff, surely there will be trolls that will have fun with it, or thieves that will try to use it for profit. I have zero reason to do that.

1. BTW I believe this has tremendous scientific value, from an anthropological point of view. It'd be a shame not to do it.

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#57

Post by jondubois »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #14
benbenolson wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this is a good reason to have some sort of technocracy element to the federal government. I lean extremely far right, but in this case, this seems like one of the few things that the federal government should be doing-- breaking up stout monopolies that can't be competed with. I'm unfamiliar with the decision, but why split up a company like Microsoft in 1999, but leave Facebook and Google alone?

It's not against the law to have a monopoly - it's against the law to exploit having a monopoly to enter another market. Microsoft was seen to be exploiting it's consumer OS market share to gain a monopoly in the browser market and the productivity software market, AIUI.

It's such a strange arbitrary law though. At the root, it's about preventing companies from using their position of power to gain an unfair advantage in other markets.

But huge corporations like Google, Facebook and Amazon are using their scale and their positions to take over markets. They can easily take control of any market they want, for them it's just a matter of doing so in a way that doesn't upset regulators. Regulators are already the bottleneck for them.

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#58

Post by nnfy »

grondilu wrote: post #39

Can someone explain to me why this so-called "privacy" is such a big deal on internet? Can't internet, or at least a major part of it, be considered a public place? I mean, when I walk in the street, I do not wear a mask (I suspect that'd be illegal in my country), yet I do not worry about someone using surveillance cameras to track all my activities. Sure, it could technically be done but I'm not that important : no…

It might take weeks for someone to identify you in real life based on a grainy still image from a camera. And then one would still have to correlate among people, other cameras, and locations to learn anything about you without surveillance.

With the internet, because of data aggregation, I can go on piple and find all of that about you and more in 2 minutes.

The power with which one may invade privacy over the internet is unprecedented. Let's say you frequent a coffee shop commonly visited by republican groups. In just a few minutes, in theory, someone could find out about every single time you visited, and use that against you. Replace republican coffee shop with sex shop, doctor, psychologist, democrat gathering...some things are better left hidden, because people are terrible.

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#59

Post by pmoriarty »

grondilu wrote: post #39

Can someone explain to me why this so-called "privacy" is such a big deal on internet? Can't internet, or at least a major part of it, be considered a public place? I mean, when I walk in the street, I do not wear a mask (I suspect that'd be illegal in my country), yet I do not worry about someone using surveillance cameras to track all my activities. Sure, it could technically be done but I'm not that important : no…

You know, every now and then there's a leak in voter registration data, and people start freaking out at the thought that others might know what their political affiliation is.

Well, that kind of leak is really no longer necessary. Your browsing, consuming, and posting histories can all be used to deduce that information and much, much more about you.

Try keeping any of your political opinions secret these days. Short of not saying anything to anyone, it's hard to keep it secret (especially from a determined, well-funded adversary) unless you jump through a million hoops.

The reason people freak out about voter registration data being leaked is that they know that once their political affiliations are known, they can be targeted by their political enemies. Now this kind of targeting is trivial without even needing voter registration data.

Re: When it comes to internet privacy, be afraid, analyst suggests

#60

Post by Chardok »

"Opting out doesn’t work. It’s nonsense to tell people not to carry a credit card or not to have an email address. And “buyer beware” is putting too much onus on the individual. People don’t test their food for pathogens or their airlines for safety."

This is a brilliant line and it works so well because he is absolutely right: it should not be on the burden of the consumer to make sure their products are safe, be it from listeria or a spy device disguised as a children's toy.

I don't know what needs to happen for people to get outraged, but privacy needs to be a mainstream political issue. Perhaps we need to see what Google and Facebook actually have on us...

Post reply on HN