Live data from Hacker News

Off-Facebook activity

facebook.com

361–370 of 395 posts

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#361
post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is such a weird way to think about it. Credit cards don't cost anything. In some vague grandiose sense prices are slightly higher since credit cards exists and merchants want to cover their fees but my perspective as a customer spending via a credit card is basically free money. There's no dog and pony show except buying things like I normally would. * I get literal cash through their rewards program which j…

The point is that everything you buy with the card is at least 2% more expensive, because the merchants are just passing on their credit card fees to the consumer. You are not saving money in any way, shape or form. Once upon a time, it was beneficial for a merchant to accept credit cards, it lowered their costs for handling cash, which meant they saved money and the 2% cost for each transaction was reasonable. In a…

Which is all fine and good but my options are pay 2+% more for everything and get nothing or pay 2+% more and get something.

Like there’s no point to trying to punch a river as a lowly software dev completely unrelated to finance and politics.

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#363
post #13

Wow that's creepy. It lists apps where a) I didn't use FB login/signup and b) used a different email address to sign up. How do they cross-reference that to me? Hand how can I prevent that outside of their tools (which I assume still violate my privacy)?

What you can do to prevent this is: 1) Install https://www.eff.org/privacybadger to prevent trackers from being loaded 2) Install https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autode... to delete any cookies you might have accepted after a week time or so, which prevents the infinite gobbling-up of your data after innocently accepting a cookie once 3) Install the Google, Facebook, Twitter and Amazon container…

I thought Google Analytics had a decent privacy policy that would prevent Google from doing anything with GA data. But I remember some fuzzy wording like "your data" which could simply mean that Google considers GA data to be their data.

Has anyone done a good deep dive on what Google actually does with GA data?

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#364

To me the thing that bothered me most was that a mental health site (Psychologytoday.com) that I used to find a therapist was passing the information on my searches to Facebook, presumably to aid in targeted advertising. Honestly, I think that health-related searches that are directly tied to a specific individual (especially without informed consent - I didn’t log in or receive any notice this was being done) should…

This needs to be brought to the attention of legislators. Our digital health data needs to be protected like it is in a real world setting.

I wonder what Google is doing with all those health related searches I'm making...

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#365
post #364

To me the thing that bothered me most was that a mental health site (Psychologytoday.com) that I used to find a therapist was passing the information on my searches to Facebook, presumably to aid in targeted advertising. Honestly, I think that health-related searches that are directly tied to a specific individual (especially without informed consent - I didn’t log in or receive any notice this was being done) should…

This needs to be brought to the attention of legislators. Our digital health data needs to be protected like it is in a real world setting. I wonder what Google is doing with all those health related searches I'm making...

I think a solution would be for people to own their own personally identifiable information, in much the same way that a celebrity can own their “likeness”.

Unauthorized copying or use of this information could be simple copyright infringement, which is apparently criminal enough to involve the FBI if you are a movie studio with enough money spend on political donations.

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#366

I was surprised to see that Plex is sharing a bunch of interactions with Facebook despite me only signing in with email. They seem to just blindly correlate the email address with whatever Facebook account it points to. There is no mention of Facebook on their privacy page[1]. As a lifetime Plex Pass holder this has damaged my credibility with them. One of their employees says this is in error[2] so hopefully it will…

Yeah, I was really surprised to see Plex in my friend's off-FB-activity list. I've been wanting to switch to Emby, but I already have a Plex lifetime membership, and it would be difficult to get friends to make the switch. I'm not liking Plex's direction with getting into the streaming business, along with this FB spyware mishap.

> it would be difficult to get friends to make the switch

Could you elaborate on why this is an issue? Plex doesn't really have network effects and is usually only managed by 1 person.

Maybe you give your friends access to your instance? In which case it seems like they are in no position to complain.

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#367
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> feeling all giddy when you get a "reward" later means you've been gamed. It doesn't really feel that way as you're flying to Hawaii for free.

You're not flying to Hawaii for free. Every single purchase you made with the card was more expensive than it had to be, because the merchants needed to cover their credit card fees. What you're doing is the equivalent of always paying with bills, and dropping your spare change in a jar. And when the jar is full, you buy a ticket to Hawaii with the money in it. Except with a credit card, they keep the jar, take half…

[deleted]

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you’re a savvy customer you get “cash back rewards” from your credit card, meaning some of the fees just end up coming back to you.

A "savvy" customer has a card that doesn't make them perform a dog and pony show like you describe. A savvy customer's card charges the lowest reasonable rate in order to provide the service. Giving someone money and then feeling all giddy when you get a "reward" later means you've been gamed.

A "savvy" customer pays their entire credit card bill every month, so the actual interest paid is zero. At that point, the rewards are the only meaningful difference in return from one card to another.

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#369
post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "savvy" customer has a card that doesn't make them perform a dog and pony show like you describe. A savvy customer's card charges the lowest reasonable rate in order to provide the service. Giving someone money and then feeling all giddy when you get a "reward" later means you've been gamed.

But this is such a weird way to think about it. Credit cards don't cost anything. In some vague grandiose sense prices are slightly higher since credit cards exists and merchants want to cover their fees but my perspective as a customer spending via a credit card is basically free money. There's no dog and pony show except buying things like I normally would. * I get literal cash through their rewards program which j…

It's also worth mentioning that cash isn't necessarily any less expensive for merchants to accept. It is if you're talking about a small local business or something, but if you're paying for the actual labor of counting cash, delivering and depositing it to the bank, as well as the increased security risks and costs of holding large sums of cash, it starts to add up.

Re: Off-Facebook activity

#370
post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is such a weird way to think about it. Credit cards don't cost anything. In some vague grandiose sense prices are slightly higher since credit cards exists and merchants want to cover their fees but my perspective as a customer spending via a credit card is basically free money. There's no dog and pony show except buying things like I normally would. * I get literal cash through their rewards program which j…

The point is that everything you buy with the card is at least 2% more expensive, because the merchants are just passing on their credit card fees to the consumer. You are not saving money in any way, shape or form. Once upon a time, it was beneficial for a merchant to accept credit cards, it lowered their costs for handling cash, which meant they saved money and the 2% cost for each transaction was reasonable. In a…

If you paid cash, in virtually every case you'd pay exactly the same price because most merchants don't provide cash discounts. If your merchant does provide a cash discount, I would suggest taking advantage of it. But if they don't provide a cash discount, you're still paying that 2% margin anyway without receiving any benefit from it.

Likewise, except for small businesses whose owners don't actually price in the cost of their own time and labor, it's not entirely obvious to me that the cost of accepting credit card payments actually is any more expensive than the cost of handling cash, which is probably why cash discounts are rare. The main exception to that seems to be gas stations (which usually have a lower price for debit cards and not straight cash), except even in that case, I get an even bigger discount by using Costco's gas station, which doesn't have any such discount. You do address this point...

> > Once upon a time, it was beneficial for a merchant to accept credit cards, it lowered their costs for handling cash, which meant they saved money and the 2% cost for each transaction was reasonable. In a world where everyone is using credit cards for every purchase, that 2% is essentially a tax instead.

That makes no sense. If the cost of receiving credit card transactions is 2%, that doesn't imply that the cost of receiving any other kind of transaction is 0%. If there's no cash discount, the difference in cost to the consumer is zero anyway. But the difference in cost to the merchant isn't 2% either, because if they accepted a different form of payment, the difference in cost would be 2% minus the cost of accepting that different form of payment. (And if they didn't accept any form of payment at all, the cost would effectively be 100% because there would be no sales). In a world where credit card sales are ubiquitous, if anything, credit cards become a better deal for merchants because there's less economy of scale for cash-handling services.

All in all, I would even suspect there are instances where credit card rewards end up providing a net positive to a sufficiently devoted cardholder simply because most people are not going to expend the time and effort necessary to maximize their credit card rewards. It's just like Vegas in that sense--while it's true that "the house always wins", casinos will also comp you rooms and drinks, and there are documented instances in which you would expect to be better off playing video poker or blackjack for long enough to get a free room (assuming perfect play, which means memorizing a small decision tree). Why is this possible? Because the vast majority of people don't play perfect blackjack or video poker. Businesses plan for average-case expected customer behavior and not best-case (or worst-case from their perspective).

Post reply on HN