Explaining to people what they should do regarding matters that there are no ways to achieve the stated goals is the laziest, lowest value category of journalism. It's a plague.
There's a way to achieve the stated goals: have the government come down real hard both on the low-level data crime and the big players that are supposedly legit. Burn it all down.
Why we should end the data economy
21–30 of 390 posts
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#22Anyone know of a confirmed instance of: > They generate profits by ... selling [your personal information] to ... prospective employers ... ? This one seems unlikely but who knows.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#23Explaining to people what they should do regarding matters that there are no ways to achieve the stated goals is the laziest, lowest value category of journalism. It's a plague.
There's a way to achieve the stated goals: have the government come down real hard both on the low-level data crime and the big players that are supposedly legit. Burn it all down.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uhhh, you can stop using said services and software that abuse privacy, e.g., Facebook, Google, Twitter, TicToc, etc.
That doesn't end the data economy. It sort of ends part of your personal interaction with the data economy.
If nobody gave their data to services that sell it on or use it for profit then there is no data economy.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#25For example: You want to vote in an online poll by company A. Company A collects data about you and sells it, so you must agree to their privacy policy. Company A's privacy policy discloses that they sell your data to Companies B, C and D. Companies B, C and D have provided a list of its customers to Company A, and Company A includes those lists as well. In addition, the customers of those companies provide lists (as all data brokers would be required to do).
If its seems like it could get overly complicated with huge lists of data brokers for a simple online poll, that's the idea. You shouldn't have to wonder how many entities you're giving access to your information when, for example, you want to vote for MLB All-stars. MLB wants your name, address, email, phone number, and they disclose they'll "share it with partners" but they don't say who those partners are, how many exist, and if they have their own "partners". Vote for your favorite player and you could be getting a phone call for life insurance 15 minutes later after your number has been passed through 5 different companies.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#26Explaining to people what they should do regarding matters that there are no ways to achieve the stated goals is the laziest, lowest value category of journalism. It's a plague.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#27We need to go back to the TV model. I mean we sold things back in 1995 right? You go to a website about babies, you get baby ads. You go to a website about electrified fences, you get ads for trucks, tractors, backhoe rentals (even in your area because of your IP address - but that's it) It's damn near equivalent to local / cable TV.
Also, what ever happened to showing ads to people who aren’t already interested in your product to expand your brand and maybe bring in new customers? The current ad model feels overfitted to me.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#28People will get tired of the junk mail and companies will lose money trying to peddle data.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#29The biggest barrier to this has been that lots of valuable data (eg. Facebook's social graph, Android contact data) is data about relationships between people, not the people themselves, and so would logically have multiple owners. But that's not really a big barrier with modern technology: the crypto world solved multi-person ownership with multisig wallets several years ago.
Re: Why we should end the data economy
#30Anyone know of a confirmed instance of: > They generate profits by ... selling [your personal information] to ... prospective employers ... ? This one seems unlikely but who knows.
It's indirect. Employers use one of many firms that do background checks, and those firms pay for access to the data.
Aren't they opening themselves up to lawsuits if they match the wrong person to the wrong potential employee?
Additionally, isn't it illegal to decide to hire/not-hire based on a bunch of protected traits? (age, sex, orientation, religion, etc.)
It seems like a lot of the quoted information would be off-limits.