2016 Schneier on Security "Data is a Toxic Asset": https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/03/data_is_a_tox...
FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
41–50 of 359 posts
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#42To me, what's missing from that set of recommendations is some method to increase the liability of companies who mishandle user data. It is insane to me that I can be notified via physical mail of months old data breaches, some of which contained my Social Security number, and that my only recourse is to set credit freezes from multiple credit bureaus.
Regulation is key, but I don’t see it as likely when our society is poisoned by culture war bs. Once we put that behind us (currently unlikely), we can pass sane laws reigning in huge corporations.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#43[deleted]
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
And it's not just here. The EU: Unlike the barbarians across the pond, we actually protect people's privacy rights. Also the EU: ChAt CoNtRoL
this view presupposes the state as “just another actor” as opposed to a privileged one that can take actions that private actors can’t
In the matter of corporations vs governments, if you tally up number of people shot it's clear which of the two is more dangerous. You would think Europe of all regions would be quick to recognize this.
I don't like corporations spying on me, but it doesn't scare me nearly as much as the government doing it. In fact the principle risk from corporations keeping databases is giving the government something to snatch.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#45> Profound Threats to Users Can Occur When Targeting Occurs Based
on Sensitive Categories
> Targeted ads based on knowledge about protected categories can be especially distressing. One example is when someone has not disclosed their sexual orientation publicly, but an ad assumes their sexual orientation. Another example is when a retailer identifies someone as pregnant and targets ads for baby products before others, including family, even know about the pregnancy. These types of assumptions and inferences upon which targeted advertising is based can in some instances result in emotional distress, lead to individuals being misidentified or misclassified, and cause other harms.
If this is one of the biggest harms the FTC can come up with, then honestly as a consumer I don't really care. Having free youtube is worth getting a few mistargeted ads, or I CAN JUST TURN TARGETED ADS OFF. Advertising isn't someone harassing you, its an ad that I can close or just report as not being accurate. I'd really be interested to hear from someone who thinks getting a mistargeted ad is in top 10 most stressful things in their life.
What I would really be interested in is the raw responses from the companies, not this report.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#46> Profound Threats to Users Can Occur When Targeting Occurs Based on Sensitive Categories > Targeted ads based on knowledge about protected categories can be especially distressing. One example is when someone has not disclosed their sexual orientation publicly, but an ad assumes their sexual orientation. Another example is when a retailer identifies someone as pregnant and targets ads for baby products before others…
Use your imagination?
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#47"these surveillance practices can endanger people’s privacy, threaten their freedoms, and expose them to a host of harms, from identify theft to stalking." Is there any evidence that any of these things have ever happened as a result of this sort of data collection? I'm not talking about data posted to social media, I'm talking about the specific data collection described in this FTC press release.
I have been stalked and harassed by an Apple employee using data they were able to glean from their access at Apple. The impossible part is proving the abuse. All of these companies keep their database, access controls, and everything they possible can about these data lakes secret. The simple fact of the matter is that you will never have any evidence someone looked you up in a database. It is really easy to walk th…
Apple wasn't listed and (outside the app store) doesn't collect the data described in the press release.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#48> Profound Threats to Users Can Occur When Targeting Occurs Based on Sensitive Categories > Targeted ads based on knowledge about protected categories can be especially distressing. One example is when someone has not disclosed their sexual orientation publicly, but an ad assumes their sexual orientation. Another example is when a retailer identifies someone as pregnant and targets ads for baby products before others…
> I CAN JUST TURN TARGETED ADS OFF
The only reason you have the option to do this is because of groups pushing back against advertising companies. Ad companies have no incentive to offer the option to disable targeting.
If you like having this option available, then you should like this FTC report and the position they are taking.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#49Behind the ball by 15 years to start taking this seriously and beginning to think about pushing back, but better late than never. Next please reign in the CRAs.
I think Snowden was bang on when in 2013 he warned us of a last chance to fight for some basic digital privacy rights. I think there was a cultural window there which has now closed.
Snowden pointed and everyone looked at his finger. It was a huge shame, but a cultural sign that the US is descending into a surveillance hell hole and people are ok with that. As someone who was (and still is) vehemently against PRISM and NSLs and all that, it was hard to come to terms with. I'm going to keep building things that circumvent the "empire" and hope people start caring eventually.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
this view presupposes the state as “just another actor” as opposed to a privileged one that can take actions that private actors can’t
In the matter of corporations vs governments, if you tally up number of people shot it's clear which of the two is more dangerous. You would think Europe of all regions would be quick to recognize this. I don't like corporations spying on me, but it doesn't scare me nearly as much as the government doing it. In fact the principle risk from corporations keeping databases is giving the government something to snatch.
because the government has a monopoly on violence. i would much prefer that to corporations being able to wage war themselves