11–20 of 76 posts
I've always found it curious why no one sets up a class-action lawsuit about the privacy and 3rd party selling of data.
In the US, you are free to collect any data you can observe (assuming you don't interfere with others' rights). You are also free to trade what you collect with others. On what basis could someone bring a class-action lawsuit about sales of data that was lawfully collected by a third-party?
Geofeedia has since posted a response [2].
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12688548
[2] http://blog.geofeedia.com/a-commitment-to-freedom-of-speech-...
in any case, it's probably best to assume police and other government agencies can access your social network data. the ACLU may well win a million court cases, but the data is out there. i don't see an effective way to stop police, as individuals, or as small independently organized groups, from accessing this sort of data, whether legally or illegally. someone will find a way to get that information to the police i…
I don't know what offended me more, that Geofeedias work was so laughably amateur, or that they got paid so much for it. Good for the social media companies to shut them out, even if just to save face.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, you are free to collect any data you can observe (assuming you don't interfere with others' rights). You are also free to trade what you collect with others. On what basis could someone bring a class-action lawsuit about sales of data that was lawfully collected by a third-party?
Well, the argument would be that it wasn't within the lawful allowed use.
Social networks are double edged swords by their nature.
It seems reasonable at time when "protesting" means shutting down infrastructure.
There is a long history of blocking crucial infrastructure during civil unrest and protesting. Its used as a tactic because its effective. Nothing about it is new or specific to today's society. How does that justify potentially infringing upon the protected rights of the protestors?
So are armed mobs that murder political opponents. Might does not equal right.
People have a right to protest.
They don't have a right to destroy property that doesn't belong them.
They don't have the right to circumvent democracy and infringing upon the rights of everyone else by shutting down infrastructure that belongs to the all people.
It seems reasonable at time when "protesting" means shutting down infrastructure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, you are free to collect any data you can observe (assuming you don't interfere with others' rights). You are also free to trade what you collect with others. On what basis could someone bring a class-action lawsuit about sales of data that was lawfully collected by a third-party?
Well, the argument would be that it wasn't within the lawful allowed use.
I'm certain in the future that companies that sell third-party data to the government for this type of thing will get limited by large social networks due less to the reputational risk but more to the fear that the knowledge people are being watched will cause them to change or even limit their behavior on the platform. To wit, it behooves Facebook to ensure that the majority of two individuals' social media interact…
in any case, it's probably best to assume police and other government agencies can access your social network data. the ACLU may well win a million court cases, but the data is out there. i don't see an effective way to stop police, as individuals, or as small independently organized groups, from accessing this sort of data, whether legally or illegally. someone will find a way to get that information to the police i…
If only there was some way to not voluntarily post all one's personal data and activities online.
People are sold a phone to which they provide some details including social media logins and install some apps.
They then carry their phone around with them not realizing that the phone is automatically uploading it's location to various services.
If you were to poll people, "Does having Facebook installed imply your location will be broadcast to Facebook 24/7?", I think you might be surprised to find out that even despite that leading question that people in fact don't realize that.
To use an adroid phone requires a google account to which your location will be transmitted. You can ask google to stop this happening but then you're back to the issue that people need to be aware this is even happening.
In tech circles people are well educated about this particular issue. More widely this is less well known.