The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022) • Hacker News Board

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#21

Post by 23B1 » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:51 PM UTC

They're not just storing and using this data for their own private/commercial purposes.

They're also licensing it and selling it to third parties, which in turn will sell it to government(s) or other third-parties; the data ramifies and spreads throughout the digital panopticon.

There is very little you can do as an individual to escape this. The privacy settings on your phone, in your apps, on your laptop, your router – they are the illusion of control. Heavy top-down regulation won't work, never has.

All you can do is attempt to limit what you share. The work required to do it well is astronomical, high-friction, and essentially can exclude you from much of society and the economy.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#22

Post by tristor » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:52 PM UTC

BurningFrog wrote: post #17

bobim wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insurance companies are very interested by your workout routine and how you drive your car, so they can adjust their offering specially for you… We can’t get laws banning this soon enough.

Bad drivers should pay more for car insurance.

True. The problem is that telematics can’t tell you who is a bad driver and who isn’t. Instead they approximate bad driving by rate of acceleration, brake pressure, and speed. To these systems anyone who drives the way you are taught to drive in any serious course outside high school would be flagged as a bad driver, despite statistically have lower accident rates.

The things that actually make people bad drivers are things like driving unpredictability, failing to signal, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and not paying attention / distracted driving. These are the things that cause most crashes. They also can’t be directly measured with telematics and none of the measurements we have is a good proxy.

So most folks would agree that bad drivers should pay more for insurance, but it doesn’t follow that sending telematics to insurance companies is a useful or accurate way to do that. It’s certainly not worth the privacy trade off.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#23

Post by gruez » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:53 PM UTC

z_ack wrote: post #12

I did an experiment: I deleted all the cookies using privacy settings of my browser then I avoid to click anything about cookies' authorisation, i.e. if a page present that kind of requests I immediately close the page itself. At the and, I verified that cookies are presente on browser's storage despite my absence of authorisation, even third parties cookies. So, yes, I agree: commercial surveillance is creepy and I…

>I verified that cookies are presente on browser's storage despite my absence of authorisation

That doesn't say much. Even the GDPR allows for some cookies to be stored without consent.

>Strictly necessary cookies — These cookies are essential for you to browse the website and use its features, such as accessing secure areas of the site. Cookies that allow web shops to hold your items in your cart while you are shopping online are an example of strictly necessary cookies. These cookies will generally be first-party session cookies. While it is not required to obtain consent for these cookies, what they do and why they are necessary should be explained to the user.

https://gdpr.eu/cookies/

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#24

Post by Nextgrid » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:53 PM UTC

ssss11 wrote: post #19

teddyh wrote: post #3

> Don’t get hung-up on consent folks, it’s not needed if a business has what’s called a ‘legitimate interest’ – which can be a rather stretchy, elastic term when in the hands of less reputable businesses Less reputable businesses will simply do whatever they like, but claiming “legitimate interest” means something specific: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re... >

It seems every website thinks they need your PII for legitimate interests though, i wonder how many have actually been taken to court, and actually lost. I bet close to zero, and zero.

There is no will to actually enforce the GDPR even across the EU.

Much stronger cases than auditing vague “legitimate interest” have been stuck in legal limbo for years.

UK since Brexit is outright hostile to GDPR - not that they’ve enforced it in the past, but now they want to (and maybe already did) relax their regulation even further.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#25

Post by Nextgrid » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:55 PM UTC

afpx wrote: post #5

What do they even do with this information? The ads they feed me haven’t become more relevant.

Collecting and processing this information provides paychecks and careers for many people - they aren’t particularly interested in making the tracking actually beneficial to the business, what matters is merely the illusion of it being beneficial so they keep their paycheck.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#26

Post by ant_li0n » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:57 PM UTC

afpx wrote: post #5

What do they even do with this information? The ads they feed me haven’t become more relevant.

User data (and the resultant behavioral prediction) is the new gold rush. Even if the data is not immediately useful, it can be stored and used later.

There's the (now) old saying, "if the product is free, then you are the product" but that's not entirely accurate. You are the source of raw materials. These materials can then be fed into a model which will predict your behavior. Right now this can be seen simply in the space of funneling content to you, in order to get you to buy things. But companies are not governments and can sell their product to anybody (including governments) in order to predict or direct your behavior.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#27

Post by dspillett » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 1:58 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #3

> Don’t get hung-up on consent folks, it’s not needed if a business has what’s called a ‘legitimate interest’ – which can be a rather stretchy, elastic term when in the hands of less reputable businesses Less reputable businesses will simply do whatever they like, but claiming “legitimate interest” means something specific: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re... >

> “legitimate interest” means something specific

“We see your preference, but fuck you and your preference we want to anyway.”

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#28

Post by sircastor » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 2:01 PM UTC

One of the effects of runaway capitalism of that consoles are pressured (either by stock holders or internally) to keep earning, keep growing, keep getting. And for a lot of businesses, they’ve already reached their market equilibrium. They don’t have room for more growth. So they have to start finding other areas to grow and to earn. Even if they have no business being in these areas in the first place.

The promise of data as the next source of easy money is too hard to pass up. And because life is hard enough, a lot of customers are willing to give it up for free to save a few bucks.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#29

Post by numpad0 » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 2:03 PM UTC

afpx wrote: post #5

What do they even do with this information? The ads they feed me haven’t become more relevant.

I think we're all misunderstanding ad relevance. An ad that trick you into buying what you were not intending to is more effective than otherwise. An ad for a MacBook shown to someone dead set on buying one soon, is not effective, and only relevant in end-user perception, not in actuality. Many "irrelevant" ads are probably relevant from that perspective, just we all are not comfortable with the concept of an ad in entirety anyway.

Re: The problem of creeping commercial surveillance (2022)

#30

Post by IAmNotAFix » Fri, Sep 01, 2023, 2:05 PM UTC

z_ack wrote: post #12

I did an experiment: I deleted all the cookies using privacy settings of my browser then I avoid to click anything about cookies' authorisation, i.e. if a page present that kind of requests I immediately close the page itself. At the and, I verified that cookies are presente on browser's storage despite my absence of authorisation, even third parties cookies. So, yes, I agree: commercial surveillance is creepy and I…

Only tracking cookies require consent. Cookies could be about the last time you saw the website's weather content, in which case it's purely functional and need no consent.