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

171–180 of 264 posts

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

#171

Post by kerkeslager »

drraid0 wrote: post #98
kerkeslager wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One particularly horrifying example of this is dating. In Brooklyn where I live, dating has moved online so thoroughly that many women I've talked to simply refuse to consider men they meet in person as potential partners. It's definitely still possible to date the old fashioned way, but it's obviously more difficult. I don't date online, but I've been blessed with fairly good looks, a successful career, and decent s…

That's very hard to believe. Is this 100% anecdotal or are there studies?

What part don't you believe?

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

#172

Post by clarkmoody »

Chardok wrote: post #60

"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…

> privacy needs to be a mainstream political issue

No way. The political process will not produce a workable, sustainable, reasonable solution.

The only way that privacy becomes important to existing large companies is if their users demand it -- and leave for competitors if they don't get it. I'm afraid that average people don't understand why privacy is important, and it will take a change in cultural mindset to improve the situation (read: a generation).

Another (and better) way for users to regain privacy is a technological shift in which new companies with a better business model and technology replace the current batch of incumbents. This is the more likely outcome, as billion-dollar profits tend to make companies conservative and ripe for disruption.

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

#173

Post by axedwool »

nocman wrote: post #134
jack6e wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just because people have accepted something doesn't mean they deem it "acceptable". Actually, that is exactly, literally what it means. Perhaps you mean that just because we find something acceptable, we don't deem it moral, or optimal, or desirable. The distressing reality presented in the interview is that we accept non-benevolent, non-ideal options because they are good enough to be accepted, and not bad enough…

Yeah I knew someone would come back with that -- but that's only true if you tie a very strict one-to-one meaning between every use of the verb "accept" and the adjective "acceptable". Words have subtle meanings. If you paid attention to my post, I was clearly drawing a line between the fact that people accept the fact that they really don't have a good alternative to using, say, Google. But they may not find it acce…

I don't think people in an unacceptable situation 'accept' it. With your example of unacceptable workplaces, they express their resentment in other ways. Maybe they find the minimum they can produce without being disciplined and only do that much. Maybe they spread malicious gossip at the office. Maybe they go home and abuse their spouse or children. Maybe they become alcoholics, or political extremists, or religious fanatics. Maybe they become depressed and commit suicide. The world offers plenty of examples. People trapped in situations they find unacceptable don't suffer in silence; they become pathological, dangerous people.

The issues of unacceptable mass surveillance can and will, eventually, cause some kind of response by people who don't accept it. If there are a lot of those people, I doubt the response will be pretty.

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

#174

Post by KSteffensen »

zipwitch wrote: post #150
ballenf wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we've all seen the story over and over: populist politician gets in power and forgets everything. They start to sacrifice principles in return for staying in power in order to ostensibly do the right thing later. But later never comes. So, maybe theoretically we can influence, but understanding the nature of what a self-interested, pragmatic government beaurocrat values is incredibly important. I think the pa…

Politicians aren't the problem. They don't exist in a vaccuum. They're a symptom. Democracy is only the problem insofar as we (here in the US) do not have one, we just pretend we do. Democracy and Republic both mean a government by the public. Voting once a year, donating money, and writing stuff on the net are utterly inadequate for that end. Public government needs educated and involved citizenry. It means putting…

People in democracies get the politicians they deserve. Look at Italy, the USA, Argentina, Hungary, Denmark, wherever

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

#175

Post by zpghjll »

clarkmoody wrote: post #172
Chardok wrote: post #60

"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…

> privacy needs to be a mainstream political issue No way. The political process will not produce a workable, sustainable, reasonable solution. The only way that privacy becomes important to existing large companies is if their users demand it -- and leave for competitors if they don't get it. I'm afraid that average people don't understand why privacy is important, and it will take a change in cultural mindset to im…

The political process should represent the will of the people and find solutions that represent the will of the people. The free market is not necessarily the best solution because it is arguable that we don't really live in a free market; consumers aren't all that educated or rational. The problem is that companies will find ways to subvert their users into thinking privacy is not important. They already have a large captive audience and they can condition then to think as they please.

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

#176

Post by Nelkins »

kerkeslager wrote: post #164
handsomechad wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you / the women in the demographic you are talking about, if you do not mind me asking?

If I'm not willing to give my personal information to Tinder, why would I post it on HN?

Your personal website with an "About" page is in your HN profile...

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

#177

Post by cerved »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #10

I once asked Bruce Schneier at a conference to scare me. He told me to consider the associations between data. Bits and pieces that Google knows about me, that Facebook knows about me, that Amazon knows about me...think of all of those little meaningless bits of data being associated all together to build a picture perfect model of my life, and then sold to advertisers, who know enough about your life to attempt to m…

If advertisers have so much data, are able to know you so intimately and manipulate every step of your life then how come the vast majority of online advertising has such mediocre results?

Not trying to be snarky, it's just to me something doesn't quite add up in this picture.

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

#178

Post by KSteffensen »

ballenf wrote: post #125
Anderkent wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an explanation of how this is happening, not an argument that it should happen. What governments do is not some mysterious black-box that we can't influence.

I think we've all seen the story over and over: populist politician gets in power and forgets everything. They start to sacrifice principles in return for staying in power in order to ostensibly do the right thing later. But later never comes. So, maybe theoretically we can influence, but understanding the nature of what a self-interested, pragmatic government beaurocrat values is incredibly important. I think the pa…

Elect the parliament by lottery. 4 years of service if you get drafted, replace 25% of seats per year.

Would be far more representative of the people than current way and less susceptible to populism.

People often think I'm joking when I propose this but I haven't heard a good argument against it yet.

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

#179

Post by KGIII »

guelo wrote: post #111
samstave wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> money talks >>> representatives that are supposed to care You can do the math.

I think there's more to it than that. A significant portion of the public sincerely believes that the government should not regulate anything.

I am in that camp. Except, I'm very much on the left side of the political spectrum. I don't think the government should prohibit this behavior. I would rather they established regulations that ensured notice was given and loss/abuse of this data was prosecuted.

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

#180

Post by heartbreak »

kerkeslager wrote: post #164
handsomechad wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you / the women in the demographic you are talking about, if you do not mind me asking?

If I'm not willing to give my personal information to Tinder, why would I post it on HN?

I'm guessing 30, male, NYC.
Post reply on HN