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

There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 263 posts

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#251

Post by h0nd »

the_snooze wrote: post #16

I hate tech like this. It ostensibly offers some minor convenience for the end-user, but it's really just a big data grab for whatever company implemented it. A few years ago, I went to a local Shake Shack and found they replaced their cashiers with kiosks. But placing an order requires me to give them my phone number, supposedly so they can text me when my order was ready. This should have been a very simple transac…

What I mostly do not like about these new techs: dependence.

Before you needed simply cash to pay for parking.

Now you need a phone with a non-empty battery, mobile internet connection and a digital mean of payment provided by a third party that takes its share.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#252

Post by LocalH »

Ma8ee wrote: post #176
throwaway55421 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of the rent is also added to prices the store charges. The rent close to a metro station is far higher and often "local" stores are much more expensive as a result. You could attempt to unbundle that by charging people an entry fee too. Why not itemise the electricity bill whilst you're at it, etc. It's penny pinching and adds friction. I've been to Trader Joe's, if you're going there you're not at all price…

The cost of the rent is unavoidable. You can't buy anything in the store without walking in the store and buy goods that has been stored in the store The cost of parking is avoidable. You don't have to drive and park to buy goods in the store. Why should I that walk or bicycle to the store sponsor you driving and parking by paying higher prices so you can park for free?

This mindset right here is why the various large governments of the Western world are fucked. "Why should I have to pay for something I don't need, because others do?"

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#253

Post by Ma8ee »

LocalH wrote: post #252
Ma8ee wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of the rent is unavoidable. You can't buy anything in the store without walking in the store and buy goods that has been stored in the store The cost of parking is avoidable. You don't have to drive and park to buy goods in the store. Why should I that walk or bicycle to the store sponsor you driving and parking by paying higher prices so you can park for free?

This mindset right here is why the various large governments of the Western world are fucked. "Why should I have to pay for something I don't need, because others do?"

I hope you aren’t serious. I’m happy to pay taxes to pay for universal healthcare, libraries and sustainable infrastructure. I’m not willing to pay higher prices in a private store to sponsor the other people’s egoistic, highly inefficient, and environmental destroying, transportation by car.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#254

Post by djbusby »

Eelongate wrote: post #191
djbusby wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hardly do anyway - these costs are aggregated in with existing costs (labor being the largest) across 1000s of products and 10000s of transactions.

If my share of the cost is insignificant, then car drivers shouldn't be too bent out of shape about me not having to pay it.

The point is that is costs more to calculate the pennies difference than the sum of the pennies

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#255

Post by bicklet »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #236
secabeen wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there even an app at all here? If you look at their screenshots, it's all just a website. When you "sign up", they don't send you to the Google or Apple app stores, just to their app.metropolis.io site. When you look at the privacy policy, everything I see there is in line with a somewhat lawyerly description of what every web server receives. IP Address, Carrier (in the rDNS or WHOIS of the IP), HTTP referrers, H…

It sounds like you’re not aware of the news in the last decade or so. Very little chance there is no data monetization going on. Would not be profitable without it.

People park and pay money. The business model is no secret. Why would data monetization be needed?

And to assume that companies are profitable is even farther from the reality of the last decade (for better or worse).

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#256

Post by mixmastamyk »

bicklet wrote: post #255
mixmastamyk wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you’re not aware of the news in the last decade or so. Very little chance there is no data monetization going on. Would not be profitable without it.

People park and pay money. The business model is no secret. Why would data monetization be needed? And to assume that companies are profitable is even farther from the reality of the last decade (for better or worse).

The bulk of the fee goes to the landlord, not the service. FTA, states a ~$1 service fee and probably not much room to raise it. A huge money maker it is not, considering dev and infrastructure time. Unless they have a plan to sell folks' whereabouts and preferences too.

One important thing to remember, just because management doesn't plan to do it this year, doesn't mean next year's team won't.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#257

Post by Terretta »

secabeen wrote: post #208
GavinMcG wrote: post #4

I'm glad to see this framing. Reading the provisions identified in the article, you could easily react by saying "well, that's normal." Of course a parking app would ask for your vehicle's make/model and for your credit card information. But it is a cost, and the unrestrained use of that information is a further cost. And that's before you get into "need[ing] to monitor people’s unrelated web browsing and links they…

Is there even an app at all here? If you look at their screenshots, it's all just a website. When you "sign up", they don't send you to the Google or Apple app stores, just to their app.metropolis.io site. When you look at the privacy policy, everything I see there is in line with a somewhat lawyerly description of what every web server receives. IP Address, Carrier (in the rDNS or WHOIS of the IP), HTTP referrers, H…

> Is there even an app at all here?

There is an app:

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/metropolis-parking-mobility/id...

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#258

Post by novok »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #166
novok wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You own the property via a pass through single owner LLC to retain the $250k cap gains exemption. Still is a massive annoyance and complication to do so although, and mortgages are harder.

Are those not searchable on https://www.bizapedia.com/ ?

All they show is the registered agent (when I checked California companies), which doesn't have to be yourself?

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#259

Post by lotsofpulp »

novok wrote: post #258
lotsofpulp wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are those not searchable on https://www.bizapedia.com/ ?

All they show is the registered agent (when I checked California companies), which doesn't have to be yourself?

I think that obscuring that is way too complicated for most people.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#260

Post by secabeen »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #236
secabeen wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there even an app at all here? If you look at their screenshots, it's all just a website. When you "sign up", they don't send you to the Google or Apple app stores, just to their app.metropolis.io site. When you look at the privacy policy, everything I see there is in line with a somewhat lawyerly description of what every web server receives. IP Address, Carrier (in the rDNS or WHOIS of the IP), HTTP referrers, H…

It sounds like you’re not aware of the news in the last decade or so. Very little chance there is no data monetization going on. Would not be profitable without it.

I agree, there probably is data monetization. That doesn't change the fact that the site doesn't appear to be asking for, or getting, any additional data beyond that provided by default by all web browsers, or that necessary to provide the service.

If additionally intrusive data gathering was happening, that would justify an article at this level of alarm. As it is, without additional research or evidence, this is within the scope of the data available to any website host.

Post reply on HN