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

"Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

zeropartydata.es

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 286 posts

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#211

Post by DrScientist »

alt227 wrote: post #84
DrScientist wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. People made that decision.

This is a grey area. Yes people are people, but when they work for corporations they are given a green light to do things that they normally morally wouldnt do. The ability to blame it on superiors, brush it under the carpet, or hide evidence amongst billions of pieces of normal data allow 'People' to make abhorrent decisions in the best interest of making the company money. These decisions may even be incentivised b…

There is nothing special about a company in what you say - you could say the same thing about a church or a protest group - or any other grouping of people.

And yes, the leaders of a company/protest group/church might have more influence on the moral choices of it's members than the rank and file than others - but they are also people too.

A company isn't magical with an existence outside the people that define the systems, processes, and perform the work.

Sure if you are flipping burgers in famous burger chain you are following very clearly defined rules as part of a bigger system - but a person designed that system - intentionally - and people manage and maintain it.

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#212

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

naikrovek wrote: post #107
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Back in the early 2010s, they found a way to spy on HTTPS traffic on the iOS App Store to monitor which apps were getting popular. That's what allowed them to know WhatsApp and Instagram were good acquisition targets. Incorrect. An Israeli startup (Onavo) had pivoted into selling data acquired from their VPN got acquired by Facebook. Importantly, they used statistics to estimate population prevalence which is how F…

> Honestly, I generally defend Meta/targeted advertising in these threads These kinds of things now point me in a direction where I consider advertising alone to be immoral and want it banned. I should have to request information when I want it, rather than being exposed to it at all times on every available surface. There are only three ways this can go: 1) more frequent and more spookily relevant ads, increasing th…

> These kinds of things now point me in a direction where I consider advertising alone to be immoral and want it banned.

I (personally) think that's going too far. Targeted advertising has been really, really good for small businesses, and given that local newspapers are basically dead and TV/radio are expensive, these business kinda have to use Meta/Google et al.

And that's fine (IMO obviously). The actual problem here is the insatiable drive for growth from public companies/the markets, coupled with wide-scale equity ownership within the companies concerned leads to people doing mental stuff like the OP to drive those numbers up.

A bunch of this is fixable by massive, massive fines (on the part of the EU). The better solution would be for the US to introduce GDPR/DMA like regulation, as US based companies are more likely to follow their home countries laws, but that's not gonna happen any time soon.

The structural problems are harder to resolve, maybe lengthen vesting schedules and/or move back towards dividends to encourage longer-term thinking and approaches.

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#213

Post by daemin »

Zenbit_UX wrote: post #188
absurdo wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some time later on HN front page: > Why I left FB,GOOG,Whatever >> Author describes seemingly abhorrently unethical and immoral practices they were completely ignorant of, occurring right in front of them that they were a key participant in. >> Accepted a massive salary to be ignorant. >> Shocked as all fuck about ethics and implications. >> Returned 0 money, cashed out. >> 100% ethical now.

A tale as old as time…

What's that famous quote? A man won't understand something if his salary is dependent on not understanding it.

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#214

Post by penguinjanitor »

mzajc wrote: post #183
WhyNotHugo wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd split that first list into two: 1a. Arbitrary apps can listen on ports without permissions. 1b. Arbitrary apps can access local ports without permissions. I've recently been experimenting with running the browser (on my desktop) in a network namespace precisely because of these reasons. Random websites shouldn't be able to access services running on localhost.

uBlock Origin ships with a "Block Outsider Intrusion into LAN" filter that I believe is enabled by default. I don't know if it works on the neutered Chrome version, but on Firefox it works so well I've had to add a few whitelists for cases where I do want access to LAN or localhost.

disabled by default, because it can break stuff which is not explicitly allowlisted

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#215

Post by WhyNotHugo »

alchemist1e9 wrote: post #109
throwawayffffas wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've recently been experimenting with running the browser (on my desktop) in a network namespace precisely because of these reasons. Let me introduce you to https://www.qubes-os.org/ .

For the ultra paranoid is there anything that can do this on a smartphone?

Nothing out of the box, but you can run VMs in a similar fashion (eg: qemu).

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#216

Post by account42 »

jiggawatts wrote: post #203
kstrauser wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but it should include everyone involved, from top to bottom. We won't get those data theft misfeatures if engineers refused to work on them out of personal liability.

I once bluntly refused to deploy an app to production because it was a finance system that handled billions of dollars and the personal data of a million children. The HTTPS certificates couldn’t be organised on time (don’t ask), so I simply refused to deploy it using HTTP only “just for now” (=years). The look of stunned shock on the project manager’s face is something I’ll never forget. He was apoplectic with mixed…

How many software developers do you think are struggling to put food on the table?

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#217

Post by account42 »

FuckButtons wrote: post #189
globalise83 wrote: post #124

This system was designed and implemented by engineers who committed code in a source control system with their name attached, and the changes were requested by product managers in tickets in the ticketing system with their name attached. Those engineers and product managers should be personally liable for an equivalent % of their annual salary as Facebook is liable for a % of its annual revenue.

Let’s be real, the people who are culpable are truly culpable are the ones who gave them the ok to build this in the first place.

If you hire a hitman both you and the hitman are liable. Same here.

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#218

Post by account42 »

throw10920 wrote: post #197
jayd16 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How often you're asked has no bearing on the morality or criminality of the ask. Hitmen can't just say "but I keep getting hired to kill people."

Comparing engineers writing tracking code for ads, to hitmen killing people, is an extremely dishonest and emotionally manipulative comparison. These things aren't even in the same category, and you know it.

You're right, hitmen only affect a relatively small number of people while software developers can easily worsen the lives of thousands if not millions.

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#219

Post by account42 »

dvngnt_ wrote: post #118
bobthepanda wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies have been trying to make AR/VR the next platform shift but I'm not super convinced that people actually want or desire this outside of a few niche games. To me it feels like it has about as much staying power as 3D glasses in movies.

For gaming and media consumption, VR is here to stay. The meta raybans have also been successful. As far as replacing your smartphone with AR glasses that remains to be seen

"Here to stay" doesn't say much. VR is as of now an extreme nieche and the reasons for that is more the space requirements and simply that having to wear a device sucks - those reasons are inherent and will not change with new tech.

Re: "Localhost tracking" explained. It could cost Meta €32B

#220

Post by account42 »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #212
naikrovek wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly, I generally defend Meta/targeted advertising in these threads These kinds of things now point me in a direction where I consider advertising alone to be immoral and want it banned. I should have to request information when I want it, rather than being exposed to it at all times on every available surface. There are only three ways this can go: 1) more frequent and more spookily relevant ads, increasing th…

> These kinds of things now point me in a direction where I consider advertising alone to be immoral and want it banned. I (personally) think that's going too far. Targeted advertising has been really, really good for small businesses, and given that local newspapers are basically dead and TV/radio are expensive, these business kinda have to use Meta/Google et al. And that's fine (IMO obviously). The actual problem h…

Targeted advertising has been good for small business in the same way that the mob is good to small business that pay up. The main reason businesses need to rely on advertising to reach people is because people are already being bombarded by competitors.
Post reply on HN