This looks like Vivaldi supporting a recommendation made by a consumer advocacy group in Norway (Norwegian Consumer Council / Forbrukerradet), and boosting their report. You can read the original report at: https://www.forbrukerradet.no/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/202...
Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
91–100 of 271 posts
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#92Frankly, I don't think this goes far enough: "Ban advertising" would be better. Almost every problem with the internet right now is caused by advertising if you dig through the chain of causality. From social media patterns that addict you to conflict and conspiracy, to popups, adware and spam, to constant attacks on our attention even when we're driving and could literally kill someone with inattention, to spreading…
Capitalism requires advertising because it needs an accelerant of consumption. If consumption stagnates, a capitalist economy enters a financial crisis that can result in the system's overthrow.
I am for banning advertising on its merits, to slow the growth of consumption for environmental reasons, and because I believe capitalism is a harmful system that should be replaced.
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#93Do we have a good proposed legal definition of surveillance-based advertising?
If it collects any data at all, it's surveillance. Anything else is a loophole.
You're betting this definition wouldn't have any serious unintended consequences?
A hypothetical example: suppose it becomes a legal nightmare to have even heavily censored webserver request logs retained for any period of time if your company does any advertising at all. That is, even if you have no intent or even ability to use those logs for advertising purposes, it might be a lot of work to prove that to the law, unless you take the hopefully-easier route of literally never advertising. "Boo hoo, companies have to prove they're not breaking the law", you might say; as is usually the case with these kinds of regulations, demonstrable compliance might be totally practical for bigger companies but a massive barrier for smaller companies, which on the margin means the difference between success and failure for quite a few businesses that would've otherwise created a lot of value.
That specific scenario probably wouldn't happen, I hope, but that's far from the only plausible failure mode! I would like to believe that we can figure out a good definition with relatively little value destroyed in the fallout if a law like this comes into effect, but it's almost certainly not going to be a single sentence.
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#94This looks like Vivaldi supporting a recommendation made by a consumer advocacy group in Norway (Norwegian Consumer Council / Forbrukerradet), and boosting their report. You can read the original report at: https://www.forbrukerradet.no/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/202...
This is very much a recommended read for everyone.
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#95I think there's a simpler way to achieve this. Force companies who leak personal data to pay reasonable damages to all the individuals involved, on the scale of 10-100 dollars, depending on how much personal info has been leaked. That would make businesses very quickly reassess how much data they need to keep, and how careful they need to be with it, without requiring any really radical legislation.
This is not a question of leaks. The data is already in the wrong hands and actively being misused.
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#96I think there's a simpler way to achieve this. Force companies who leak personal data to pay reasonable damages to all the individuals involved, on the scale of 10-100 dollars, depending on how much personal info has been leaked. That would make businesses very quickly reassess how much data they need to keep, and how careful they need to be with it, without requiring any really radical legislation.
Yeah, rather than targeting advertising I'd prefer to get to the actual point, and target mass surveillance and collection of huge troves of personal data no matter the purpose . Ban monetizing data (no selling, no pay-for-access, no derived products) and make leaks guaranteed to be expensive, so companies only keep what they have to to operate, with some large multiplier attached to the leak fine if it was related t…
> … "get to the actual point, and target mass surveillance and collection of huge troves of personal data no matter the purpose."
This! Exactly this!
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
If someone abuses your doorbell the solution isn't to install a hidden DNA and body scanner in front of your door. Also suggesting that an IP based rate limiter is the same as the surveillance in question is very disingenuous. Pick a more sensitive area than your IDE, say medicine targeting erectile dysfunction, sexual or religious preferences, etc. You may find that being allowed to collect that data, especially cov…
>If someone abuses your doorbell the solution isn't to install a hidden DNA and body scanner in front of your door. The first thing I would do is look outside to collect information on who in outside thereby infringing their privacy. >Also suggesting that an IP based rate limiter is the same as the surveillance in question is very disingenuous Recording people's IPs is definitely surveillance. >say medicine targeting…
> Sure you can. Go ahead
We'll there's your problem. First you show a complete lack of understanding of the issue, from its basic concepts to the practical manifestation and consequences, and then you conclude that it must not be a real issue.
This technique can be used to justify anything. Burning books? Sure, it's like burning extra processed wood, totally okay, go right ahead.
Ignorance is not a defense.
Also can you send me your medical data and search history? I mean you're OK with sharing this data and said nothing about it being ok only if I can do it covertly. Better yet, give me your name and address and I'll just grab that myself so it's not too much of a bother for you. It's just so I can serve cheaper better targeted ads to you.
I mean refusing and backing out now would just be hypocritical and completely undermine the case you so unsuccessfully try to make wouldn't it?
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#98I think there's a simpler way to achieve this. Force companies who leak personal data to pay reasonable damages to all the individuals involved, on the scale of 10-100 dollars, depending on how much personal info has been leaked. That would make businesses very quickly reassess how much data they need to keep, and how careful they need to be with it, without requiring any really radical legislation.
> Force companies who leak personal data to pay reasonable damages to all the individuals involved
Companies like Google and Facebook already leak.
Proof: start an ad campaign on e.g. Facebook targeted at people who have trait X, but sell a product Y not related to X. For people who click on the ad and buy your product Y, you now know they have trait X. And you can now also link that to their address info.
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#99Do we have a good proposed legal definition of surveillance-based advertising?
The report defines it as >In this context, we use the term ‘surveillance-based advertising’ as a blanket >term for digital advertising that is targeted at individuals or consumer >segments, usually through tracking and profiling based on personal data. This is ridiculous. If I am trying to advertise an Elixer IDE, then I don't want my advertisements shown to any random person on the internet. The majority of users on…
Radiculous !
Mate, you want one thing so world wide spying is ok for you ? So r. lack in imagination !
Just try to imagine what would be WWW (or other "medium") without that data hoarding... You want to ad IDE, for devs, for particular lang ? Just give money straight to forum of your interests owner. And...... DONE ! Or journal, paper, zine or whatever but do it directly.
That businesses curently DO NOT EXIST becose everything goes to Google ! And - biggest stupididy of last two centuries - to "businesesee that "model" enables". Just self serving monopoly giving away penies.
You see ? Your "survivalence is necessaary" is just lack of imagination. Literaly, current "system" prohibits new inventions and development.
Becouse where are money there are new companies/startups created. End where money are filtered via giant sucker there not much improvement can be build.
Re: Open letter: Ban surveillance-based advertising
#100I think there's a simpler way to achieve this. Force companies who leak personal data to pay reasonable damages to all the individuals involved, on the scale of 10-100 dollars, depending on how much personal info has been leaked. That would make businesses very quickly reassess how much data they need to keep, and how careful they need to be with it, without requiring any really radical legislation.
Yeah, rather than targeting advertising I'd prefer to get to the actual point, and target mass surveillance and collection of huge troves of personal data no matter the purpose . Ban monetizing data (no selling, no pay-for-access, no derived products) and make leaks guaranteed to be expensive, so companies only keep what they have to to operate, with some large multiplier attached to the leak fine if it was related t…
> The advertising is a symptom, it's not the disease.
Advertising also stimulates mass overconsumption.
If we want to save the planet, advertising is among the top things we should ban right away.