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

US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 178 posts

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#141

Post by Amezarak »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #137
paulryanrogers wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dysfunction is intentional. Baby steps to rollback ACA. Every small inconvenience pushes voters closer to their side.

So many things are intentionally broken. All of the complaints about illegal immigrants working on our farms, and yet no mention that we do have a migratory laborer visa - it's just the quota is way too low.

People complaining about illegal immigrants doing farm labor mostly don’t want you to simply give them paperwork making them legal, they want the pipeline of migrant labor restricted so labor prices are forced to rise enough to make the jobs worthwhile for citizens. I’ve noticed this is a common disconnect.

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#142

Post by WillPostForFood »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #70

I used a state (Colorado) healthcare marketplace website when I was going to take a break between jobs for a couple of months, and I feel very violated by the whole process. I entered a bunch of information to the website, knowing that the data could be expected to be shared for quotes, but I got no quote. The information didn't just flow between systems, it was just sent directly to a bunch of individuals. Instead o…

Possible you got tricked into using a private site that buys the first google sponsored google result, and talks like it is the official Colorado site but is just lead gen?

https://i.imgur.com/d2fZlTc.png

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#143

Post by WillPostForFood »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #137
paulryanrogers wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dysfunction is intentional. Baby steps to rollback ACA. Every small inconvenience pushes voters closer to their side.

So many things are intentionally broken. All of the complaints about illegal immigrants working on our farms, and yet no mention that we do have a migratory laborer visa - it's just the quota is way too low.

The migratory labor visa is not being ignored - a lot of action on that front. Some of it is stuck because of stalled budget negotiations. A full exemption of the cap for returning workers passed the house, but in the meantime, cap has been doubled.

https://www.epi.org/blog/rider-in-the-house-homeland-securit...

https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#144

Post by anigbrowl »

mistrial9 wrote: post #9

anecdata - in Berkeley CA, in the late 2010s, two individuals showed up to be in the fast-paced AD scene. One was from a former Soviet Union country, who spoke English pretty well .. and the other a woman from Columbia .. to say that both of these two were "aggressive" is an understatement. He spoke English, she was in charge of "security" .. after a very few meetups, they both formed a company for "Ad tech for Hospi…

OK, who? Vagueposting doesn't help anyone.

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#145

Post by strictnein »

anonym29 wrote: post #69
post-it wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of this kind of comment? Have pro-citizen anti-corporate laws never been passed in the past?

"Citizens" United (which allows unlimited corporate political donations by classifying them as "speech", for those out of the loop) has fundamentally changed the core incentive structures of the modern political landscape. To compare a pre-CU world to a post-CU world when it comes to matters at the intersection of corporate interests and government regulatory / legislative power is comparing apples to oranges. We nee…

Citizens United has to be the most inaccurately cited case. It did not 'allow unlimited corporate political donations by classifying them as "speech"'.

It ruled that the federal government was wrong to restrict the speech rights of some groups while allowing other very similar groups to still retain their rights. One of the major examples of this was the media industry. A for-profit newspaper company could spend whatever amount of money it wanted to on political speech. An identical company in a different field could not. This, the court ruled, was unconstitutional.

It also did not grant corporations personhood, the other thing people like to state that it did.

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#146

Post by fwipsy »

Amezarak wrote: post #141
teaearlgraycold wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many things are intentionally broken. All of the complaints about illegal immigrants working on our farms, and yet no mention that we do have a migratory laborer visa - it's just the quota is way too low.

People complaining about illegal immigrants doing farm labor mostly don’t want you to simply give them paperwork making them legal, they want the pipeline of migrant labor restricted so labor prices are forced to rise enough to make the jobs worthwhile for citizens. I’ve noticed this is a common disconnect.

What wage would they have to pay you to pick berries? I suspect it's cheaper to automate these jobs (developing the tech to do so as necessary) rather than raising wages so US citizens take the job. These really aren't desirable jobs by US standards, and automation is already underway.

Edit: I acknowledge that you're just explaining a viewpoint and you don't necessarily hold it.

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#147

Post by analog31 »

wewtyflakes wrote: post #5

It should be illegal to send the data, and illegal to accept it; burn both sides of that bridge.

I think possession of the data should be illegal. And it should be subject to statutory damages, like music piracy.

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#148

Post by vkou »

Spooky23 wrote: post #135
levocardia wrote: post #18

The actual "sharing" was using the Meta pixel and TikTok's equivalent, presumably so the healthcare exchanges could do retargeting or similarity-based marketing to get people to sign up for health care coverage. Which, narrowly, seems like a reasonable thing to do. But of course using the pixel automatically "shares" the data with Meta/ByteDance/whoever, and they get to use it for whatever nefarious purpose they want…

Nefarious indeed. Once they know who you are, they match you against insurance industry databases and can infer many health conditions and other stuff. If you’re timely with prenatal care, marketers can predict a woman’s delivery data within a week with high confidence.

Obamacare banned insurer price discrimination for pre-existing conditions.

Re: US healthcare marketplaces shared citizenship and race data with ad tech giants

#150

Post by dylan604 »

janalsncm wrote: post #138
dylan604 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like that will work similar to incarcerating drug users instead of the drug makers and distribution network?

In your analogy I would argue the website owners are analogous to the distribution network and Meta/Tiktok are analogous to the manufacturers. But I also don’t think it’s perfect because usually drug users know they are buying drugs whereas with tracking pixels it’s being done secretly.

Sure, but that's getting too far into it. Not that you're wrong though. The point was, the people that make the thing never/rarely get punished, but it is the individuals that get the hammer. If websites get fined for running the evilCorp SDKs, then the problem would be more effectively solved by going after evilCorp for providing the SDK. If there was no SDK nor reward for using it, the websites being fined would not have needed to be fined. Trying to scare people into not doing something is much less effective
Post reply on HN