LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network • Hacker News Board

Re: LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

#211

Post by LaGrange » Fri, May 10, 2013, 2:04 PM UTC

RestlessMind wrote: post #158

onemorepassword wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When it comes to privacy and PII, Google holds itself to an extremely high standard. With all due respect, but you've gotta joking. Google doesn't even hold itself to the standards set by the laws in countries it operates in. Laws that are for now still full of loopholes Google happily exploits with zero restraint, despite knowing full well (not in the last place because they've been warned on a regular basis) that…

Whats wrong with lobbying against the laws which you think are bad? In a democratic process, you can (and do) end up with laws which are crappy/outdated/unjust. Lobbying is a legitimate way to tackle this problem.

s/bad/unprofitable for a corporate entity/

Fixed that for you.

Re: LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

#212

Post by illuminate » Fri, May 10, 2013, 2:21 PM UTC

josh2600 wrote: post #196

illuminate wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"some of the ads I get hit with would make many folks blush" I'm guessing the "likes" you have that cause the targeted ads to hone in on you would also make many folks blush. At least, before I shut mine down some months ago, I had plenty of interesting likes but I never had any ads that didn't match my content.

I appreciate your insinuation about my "likes". I don't really have anything "liked" on my Facebook but please, go ahead and tell me about how my personal preferences are affecting my online experience. I'm happy that your anecdotal experience was different from mine, but your empirical evidence does not undermine mine. Good day sir.

Facebook tends to base these ads around collected data and demographics, the targeting is not generally random. Perhaps other sites you've browsed that share data with Facebook's advertising network?

I suppose there's also the possibility of malware replacing FB's ads with their own.

Re: LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

#213

Post by summerdown2 » Fri, May 10, 2013, 8:34 PM UTC

michaelochurch wrote: post #72

Y'all know that I worked for Google. On this topic, I can only say good things about the place. When it comes to privacy and PII, Google holds itself to an extremely high standard. Many of these "social" innovations that are popping up on the market place were rejected out-of-hand at Google because it holds itself to an extremely high ethical standard regarding user data, as it actually respects them. I was shocked,…

> When it comes to privacy and PII, Google holds itself to an extremely high standard.

Except that Google has for some time now been waging an all-out assault on the concept of anonymity, which at least in my mind is an important part of privacy.

Re: LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

#214

Post by mikescoffield » Sat, May 11, 2013, 1:38 AM UTC

Caerus wrote: post #11

Facebook does the same thing and it's just as creepy. I closed my "real" account around 2011. A few months back I created a new blank account because I needed access to a couple organization's pages. The only information on that account is my name (a fairly common one) and an email address which is different from the one on my original account. It's possible they have some geographic info linking the two accounts as…

It would be interesting to see someone test this on a public, shared computer.

Re: LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

#215

Post by RestlessMind » Thu, May 16, 2013, 5:58 PM UTC

LaGrange wrote: post #211

RestlessMind wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats wrong with lobbying against the laws which you think are bad? In a democratic process, you can (and do) end up with laws which are crappy/outdated/unjust. Lobbying is a legitimate way to tackle this problem.

s/bad/unprofitable for a corporate entity/ Fixed that for you.

You just made my general point in a specific use case. Anyone (individuals, groups of individuals, corporate entities...) should have freedom to voice against laws they don't like.