Live data from Hacker News

We accepted surveillance as default

vivianvoss.net

121–130 of 159 posts

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#121
post #67

I once watched a news report about the then tail end of the Ceaușescu regime. One of the indicators of the level of oppression they described was that they had video cameras mounted on street lamps.

You watched some propaganda slop, since there is no evidence that the Romanian regime used video cameras on street lamps in the 1980's. Why would they need to invest such insane amounts of money to acquire such tech (video cameras, lol, on street lamps) when they had a thriving population of curtain twitchers and snitches?

I remember Andrei Sakharov

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Sakharov

in Russia writing that he thought there were 30 people in the house across the street from him.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#122

When Apple first released App Tracking Transparency, I immediately used it to block the trackers and I have not even thought about it since because it is so simple and useful. What a contrast to modern websites which require all sorts of weird clicking gymnastics to disable similar tracking.

When Apple first released App Tracking Transparency, I immediately used it to block the trackers There seems to be a common misconception that this blocks trackers, which is not the case. Use a DNS-based ad/tracker blocker and watch the logs and you'll see that many apps happily track you. As far as I understand, ATT blocks is cross-app/website tracking. If you deny, the app does not get access to the Identifier for…

Hmm yes I should have been more specific. I am aware that it does not block trackers...my Pi-hole logs are still full of sketchy/tracking domains.

I simply meant that the unique ID can't be used to track me anymore, at least across different third party application companies. I would edit my comment but it is too late now.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#123

This is all well and good but as long as advertising is how folks make money on the web, the surveillance state will persist.

  > but as long as advertising is how folks make money on the web
Then we make this impossible.

This isn't a forum of marketers, this is a forum of engineers and makers. So... how do we make the next version of the internet fully private and prevent it from becoming overly centralized. How do we prevent companies like Google dictating the design with their browser dominance (chromium, not just Chrome)?

We definitely have some solutions to some of these problems but also need to work on others. We can probably build something that is fully encrypted and peer to peer (example projects exist!) but maintaining decentralization is still an unsolved problem. There's also issues like how we get people to buy in. Most of the population doesn't understand the nuance but does recognize there is a problem. Hell, even more informed places like HN will bicker on about the problems in certain software yet not acknowledge that there exists no perfect solution[0]. We just end up arguing and nothing gets solved, things just stay the same. That's the absolute worst part! People that want the same things end up becoming divided simply because we're really bad at listening to one another[1].

I'm sure it'll continue to be a cat and mouse game, but it also feels like many have given up. I'm exhausted too. But I'm still angry and annoyed. I'm tired and exhausted of being so tired and exhausted. To constantly be dealing with dark patterns. To constantly have things that should take 30 seconds take 30 minutes because of absolutely unnecessary (and often intentional) roadblocks. I'm tired of everyone trying to move so fast that it makes everything move so slow. I don't know how we got to a place where we're just thickening the jell-o we're trying to run through. How every little shortcut we take just makes the jell-o thicker and we pat ourselves on the back.

As we advance as a society the problems we have to solve only become more nuanced and complex, yet for some reason we've come to believe the they are simpler and easier to solve. We may have more powerful tools at hand, but a better tool doesn't make the problem you're trying to solve any less complex, it only can enable solving it or make some parts easier. The complexity is still in the problem and if we abstract it away too much then we only make things worse. IDK but somehow we've come to believe there are no such things as experts, and that we're all experts in everything. This wasn't possible in the past and our world is only more complicated, not less.

[0] I mentioned chromium so I'll use Firefox vs Chromium as an example. Every time the comparison is brought up people say how Chromium is "more complete" while ignoring how "complete" is predominantly defined by Google. The reason they have this power is browser dominance. Can you use de-googled Chromium? I'm personally unconvinced. You might be able to use something which takes out all (known) trackers, but not a Chromium that is void of Google's influence nor a Chromium that doesn't perpetuate Google dominance. But does that mean Firefox is "better"? It all depends on how you define that, and that's where the conversation gets lost. There's no truthful answer to this question and it is all extremely complicated and nuanced. There's never going to be a browser that checks all the boxes. We must give some things up in the pursuit of other things. Arguing the way we currently do is absolutely nonsensical.

[1] And by that, of course, I mean I'm a perfect listener and "you're" the problem. There's no other way to interpret me, my words are absolutely and unambiguously clear. Of course.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that the website... stays online? Have you bought a domain before or anything online before?

My personal website has been up for over two and a half decades. I've paid for hosting and for the domain name. Never had an ad on the site.

So do you expect everyone else to not earn an income from their website if they so choose?

> Never had an ad on the site.

You know there are other ways of people making money without doing ads right?

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#125

I know there is evidence like Apple ATT (iOS 14.5, April 2021). 15-25% opt-in. -$10B Meta revenue in 2022 (CFO David Wehner) But it sure looks to me like personalized ads are a paper tiger. I mean it seems like 30% of the ads I see on Facebook and YouTube are just transparent scams that they could serve me without any profiling. For instance for a week I have been in heavy rotation of an ad on Facebook which obviousl…

I used to report scams to facebook, but they deny my claim and say the ads are fine. Seems like fake AI videos of celebrities/politicians asking you to invest in alt-coins is A-OK in facebooks... book. It's infuriating.

To their credit I did get this message from them today:

    We reviewed the ad you reported and found that it goes against 
    our Advertising Standards. We let the advertiser know that we 
    removed the ad, but not who reported it.

    Thank you for letting us know. Reports like yours help us to 
    improve the integrity and relevance of advertising on Facebook.
But mine was an absolutely open and shut case.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that the website... stays online? Have you bought a domain before or anything online before?

Yes, I hosted a website for about two years. Paid for it from my own pocket. Had some fun, learned a few things. There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this?

Yes.

This predates websites, it's called commerce.

Pick any medium, humans will always find a way to transact with one another, it's been like this for thousands of years.

I don't understand why you think websites and the internet should be exempt from this?

> > There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this?

Forget websites.

How are you going to pay the rent, or put food on the table for your children if you don't want to generate money?

Unless you're retired with savings (some on HN are), have an inheritance windfall or are living on government money, then you can do things that don't need an income.

Otherwise you need to generate an income.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to report scams to facebook, but they deny my claim and say the ads are fine. Seems like fake AI videos of celebrities/politicians asking you to invest in alt-coins is A-OK in facebooks... book. It's infuriating.

To their credit I did get this message from them today: We reviewed the ad you reported and found that it goes against our Advertising Standards. We let the advertiser know that we removed the ad, but not who reported it. Thank you for letting us know. Reports like yours help us to improve the integrity and relevance of advertising on Facebook. But mine was an absolutely open and shut case.

Ads on the FB & goog network (this includes phys.org btw) are NOT paper tigers, in the sense that

  they are a reliable anti-signal
(to short, not to buy, to look at rising competitors, to look into reasons why a product might be failing, to sus out the lack of foresight in their investors, to extract other high cost channels/signals that they are still using ntless

As an example of the last one, I just learnt about an ISO standard.. )

YMMV depending on how much the network knows [it doesn't know] about you ofc ;)

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do website owners pay for server costs if you think they shouldn't make money? Should everyone be in a loss when they run a website?

i manage to do so using money i make elsewhere. the information i put on the internet is either of benefit to people or a matter of vanity. i don't afford special concern to people who want to use the internet for profit.

So you have never sold anything, or participated with other people or groups that have sold anything online because you believe that they should not use the internet for profit?

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#129

I know there is evidence like Apple ATT (iOS 14.5, April 2021). 15-25% opt-in. -$10B Meta revenue in 2022 (CFO David Wehner) But it sure looks to me like personalized ads are a paper tiger. I mean it seems like 30% of the ads I see on Facebook and YouTube are just transparent scams that they could serve me without any profiling. For instance for a week I have been in heavy rotation of an ad on Facebook which obviousl…

I try to disable a lot of web tracking stuff, so I kinda understand if advertisers have trouble targeting me. But the information they should be able to use to target me just isn't getting used at all. Are other people getting well-targeted ads? because in my experience, ad companies suck at it.

I constantly receive ads on Youtube in languages I don't speak. I can kinda make out whats happening in some of the ads, I know a bit of Spanish for instance. But the ads entirely in Turkish, Vietnamese, Arabic, Japanese, Chinese, etc, are completely lost on me. I often cannot even tell what the product is that they are advertising. My google account has language preferences set, my browser has them set, my device has them set. Google should *know* what languages I can speak. I'm not on a VPN, I'm pretty sure google knows my exact location. None of these languages are spoken particularly frequently in my area, I don't understand how I'm getting advertisements in these languages.

I used to have targeted advertisements turned off on youtube. I changed this several months ago, because the ads were literally 100% scams, deepfakes, and illegal products. I just got sick of it. I've intentionally turned on targeted ads, as it lets you have some control over the advertisements. Now I finally no longer get as many ads for pornography and illegal drugs, but its still mostly scams, and I still constantly receive ads that are completely and wildly outside of my demographic. Languages I can't speak, political ads for companies and politicians hundreds of miles away. I am shocked when i rarely receive an ad for a local restaurant or business, because it happens so incredibly rarely. When it happens, I wonder, did they actually target me to show me the local business? or was it luck? I'm convinced its the latter.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that the website... stays online? Have you bought a domain before or anything online before?

Yes, I hosted a website for about two years. Paid for it from my own pocket. Had some fun, learned a few things. There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this?

> There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this?

Most of the world has always been this way. The idea of sharing and exploring for the sake of it was a Christian ideal that rose and fell with their influence in the west.

Multiculturalism exploits generosity; competing interests replaced shared goals. If you don't profit from your efforts, someone else will.

It's not speculative: if you make free space available to campers, the postmodern entrepreneur will sell access to it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36686672

Post reply on HN