Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 359 posts

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#71

Post by idle_zealot »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #51
srndsnd wrote: post #31

To 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.

If you aren’t directly harmed yet what liability would they have? I imagine if your identity is stolen and it can be tied to a breach then they would already be liable.

That's the whole problem with "liability", isn't it? If the harms you do are diffuse enough then nobody can sue you!

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#72

Post by lesuorac »

kibwen wrote: post #63
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren’t directly harmed yet what liability would they have? I imagine if your identity is stolen and it can be tied to a breach then they would already be liable.

The fact that my data can be stolen in the first place is already outrageous, because I neither consented to allowing these companies to have my data, nor benefit from them having my data. It's like if you go to an AirBNB and the owner sneaks in at night and takes photos of you sleeping naked and keeps those photos in a folder on his bookshelf. Would you be okay with that? If you're not directly harmed, what liabilit…

I don't think thats a proper parallel.

I think a better example would be You (AirBnB Host) rent a house to Person and Person loses the house key. Later on (perhaps many years later), You are robbed. Does Person have liability for the robbery?

Of course it also gets really muddy because you'll have renting the house out for those years and during that time many people will have lost keys. So does liability get divided? Is it the most recent lost key?

Personally, I think it should just be some statutory damages of probably a very small amount per piece of data.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#73

Post by orthecreedence »

mgraczyk wrote: post #59
orthecreedence wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is really coming across as "well, nothing bad has happened yet so who cares?" If that's not the case, please let me know how you meant it. If it is the case, surely you can imagine a world in which dragnet surveillance of people who have an expectation of privacy can be abused by corporations, institutions, or private individuals. It really doesn't take a lot of imagination to picture this world.

It's been ubiquitous for around 20 years now (Google started doing mass surveillance for display ads in the early 2000s) and nothing bad has happened, so yes that's my point. If nothing bad happens for decades, and that is inconsistent with your model of danger, then the model is probably wrong

Your argument boils down to "yes, someone has had a gun pointed at my head for quite some time now, but they haven't pulled the trigger yet so I don't see the problem."

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#74

Post by drawkward »

pc86 wrote: post #69
kibwen wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that my data can be stolen in the first place is already outrageous, because I neither consented to allowing these companies to have my data, nor benefit from them having my data. It's like if you go to an AirBNB and the owner sneaks in at night and takes photos of you sleeping naked and keeps those photos in a folder on his bookshelf. Would you be okay with that? If you're not directly harmed, what liabilit…

I mean it's pretty clear that you are directly harmed if someone takes naked photos of you without your knowledge or consent and then keeps them. It's not a good analogy so if we want to convince people like the GP of the points you're making, you need to make a good case because that is not how the law is currently structured. "I don't like ads" is not a good reason, and comments like this that are seething with rag…

What is the harm? It is not obvious to me, if the victim is unaware...unless you are alleging simply that there is some ill-defined right to privacy. But if that is so, why does it apply to my crotch and not my personal data?

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#75

Post by rkagerer »

devonbleak wrote: post #16
vundercind wrote: post #6

Behind 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.

It makes me irrationally angry that I suddenly started getting spam emails from Experian. Like motherfucker I never consented for you to have my data, then you leak it all, now you're sending me unsolicited junk email? It's just such bullshit that I'm literally forced to have a relationship with these companies to freeze my credit or else I'm at the mercy of whoever they decide to release my information to without my…

That's not an irrational reaction.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#76

Post by stiffenoxygen »

mgraczyk wrote: post #30

"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.

[flagged]

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#77

Post by mgraczyk »

orthecreedence wrote: post #73
mgraczyk wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been ubiquitous for around 20 years now (Google started doing mass surveillance for display ads in the early 2000s) and nothing bad has happened, so yes that's my point. If nothing bad happens for decades, and that is inconsistent with your model of danger, then the model is probably wrong

Your argument boils down to "yes, someone has had a gun pointed at my head for quite some time now, but they haven't pulled the trigger yet so I don't see the problem."

No, I'm arguing that it's not actually a gun, and my evidence is that there are 2 billion "guns" that have been pointed at 2 billion people's heads for years, and nobody has been hurt.

It's more like a flashlight than a gun

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#78

Post by stiffenoxygen »

mgraczyk wrote: post #59
orthecreedence wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is really coming across as "well, nothing bad has happened yet so who cares?" If that's not the case, please let me know how you meant it. If it is the case, surely you can imagine a world in which dragnet surveillance of people who have an expectation of privacy can be abused by corporations, institutions, or private individuals. It really doesn't take a lot of imagination to picture this world.

It's been ubiquitous for around 20 years now (Google started doing mass surveillance for display ads in the early 2000s) and nothing bad has happened, so yes that's my point. If nothing bad happens for decades, and that is inconsistent with your model of danger, then the model is probably wrong

[flagged]

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#79

Post by stiffenoxygen »

mgraczyk wrote: post #47
mu53 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They mentioned practices that corporations do. I think any corporation that collects data on you counts here. I don't think its worth it to only talk about the examples provided in the article.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#80

Post by lotsofpulp »

twoodfin wrote: post #33
devonbleak wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me irrationally angry that I suddenly started getting spam emails from Experian. Like motherfucker I never consented for you to have my data, then you leak it all, now you're sending me unsolicited junk email? It's just such bullshit that I'm literally forced to have a relationship with these companies to freeze my credit or else I'm at the mercy of whoever they decide to release my information to without my…

My pet solution has been to make the credit reporters liable for transmitting false information to the CRAs. Chase tells Experian I opened a new line of credit with them, but it later is demonstrated that it was a scammer with my SSN? Congratulations, $5,000 fine. Of course this all gets priced in to the cost and availability of consumer credit. Good! Now the lenders have an incentive to drive those costs down (cheap…

The solution is much simpler. Put all of the consequences of being defrauded by a borrower onto the lender.

If a lender wants to be repaid, then they need to show the borrower all the evidence they have for proof that the borrower entered into the contract.

If all a lender has is the fact that a 9 digit number, date of birth, name, and address were entered online, then the borrower simply has to say “I did not enter that information”, and the lender can go pound sand.

Guarantee all the lenders will tighten up their operations very quickly, and consequently, so will the loans that appear on one’s credit report.

Post reply on HN