[flagged]
FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
91–100 of 359 posts
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#92Behind 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…
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#93Earlier 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
If you don't think anything bad happens from personal data being accessed without one's consent, please reply to this comment and share:
1. Your full name
2. Your home address
3. Your social security number (if you're American)
4. Your mother's maiden name
If you're right, then you have nothing to worry about.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#94Behind 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.
The long term consequences of 9/11.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#95Lina Khan has been on a tear. She actually seems to care about online human rights.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#96To 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.
I get a feeling that liability is the missing piece in a lot of these issues. Section 230? Liability. Protection of personal data? Liability. Minors viewing porn? Liability.
Lack of liability is screwing up the incentive structure.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#97To 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.
This is the traditional way of thinking, and a good question, but it is not the only way.
An able bodied person can fully make complaints against any business that fails their Americans with Disabilities Act obligation. In fact these complaints by able bodied well-doers is the de facto enforcement mechanism even though these people can never suffer damage from that failure.
The answer is simply to legislate the liability into existence.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#98I love the cognitive dissonance on display within the federal government. One arm: "everyone is a criminal; spy on everyone" Other arm: "hey you shouldn't really harvest all of that data"
The cognitive dissonance is in the voters and users. Even right here on HN, where most people understand the issue, you'll see conversations and arguments in favor of letting companies vacuum up as much data and user info as they want (without consent or opt-in), while also saying it should be illegal for the government to collect the same data without a warrant. In practice, the corporations and government have foun…
And in Europe, everyone and their dog uses WhatsApp
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#99Earlier 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…
> 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
Sure. In those cases, there are damages and that creates liability. I'm not sure what damages I've ever faced from any leak of e.g. my SSN.
Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FTC is under the president's authority. This is election pandering, same as Zuckerberg's backpedaling on government censorship. This is for getting votes from the undecided. Everything will be back to normal (surveillance, data collection and censorship) after the election.
I don't know if you've been watching but the FTC has actually been extremely proactive during this cycle. Lina Khan is an excellent steward and has pushed for a lot of policy improvements that have been sorely needed - including the ban (currently suspended by a few judges) on non-competes. It is disingenuous to accuse the FTC of election pandering when they've been doing stuff like this for the past four years consi…
And has sued Amazon for their use of anti-competitive pricing.
This is just what Kahn's FTC does.