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

ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

biometricupdate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 412 posts

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#291

Post by TitaRusell »

yanhangyhy wrote: post #102

It is really hard to understand that this is a country that our nation’s media and KOLs have vigorously whitewashed for decades. They say the United States protects private property, that America is free and democratic, and that everyone owns guns, so they can guarantee their own freedom. All of our people should feel ashamed of this—being deceived by the media day after day for decades. Too stupid. Even today, there…

Ah yes the famous Constitutional freedom to gun down tyrants. It turns out nobody can agree on who the tyrant is!

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#292

Post by AlecSchueler »

nosianu wrote: post #186
AlecSchueler wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The protest you linked wasn't calling for completely open borders. That's also not policy of either of the main parties in the US, as was implied above. I understand "no one is illegal" to be a counter to the use of language like "illegals" to describe the humans involved.

Why do you choose that single example, which I said was just that, and pretend my whole statement hinges on it? You are either misinformed, willfully ignorant or lying, and I've had it with this discussion style. Yes, people who use "no one is illegal" do also say "no more borders". Not every single one, clearly humans are diverse, but your statement is just false. Here a UK example even combining the statements (as…

> Why do you choose that single example, which I said was just that

Because we're looking for people saying borders should be completely opened. An example of people saying something else is irrelevant.

> Yes, people who use "no one is illegal" do also say "no more borders".

Ok but the conversation is about people saying the latter. It was you who brought the former into the conversation.

> Here a UK example

Which British parties are active in the United States?

> Another example, also showing this is an older movement

The claim was that "the left" has no response to emigration issues beyond "open all borders" and that this was the policy of "one party." The existence of an anti-borders movement is again irrelevant to the questions I raised in response to this assertion.

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#293

Post by hamdingers »

reactordev wrote: post #204
dns_snek wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No because employees are making the actual thing that inflicts harm while consumers' actions are completely diffused and many steps removed from the harm they cause. That's why ad-tech is so effective in the first place. Consumer pays $1.10 for a can of coke, $0.10 of that goes to ad-tech, the consumer watches some coke ads, ad-tech pays $0.05 to the publisher and the consumer receives $0.05 in benefits in the form o…

Replace “tech” in this scenario with “ammunition”. Does your argument still hold up? >”employees are making the actual thing that inflicts harm while consumers' actions are completely diffused and many steps removed from the harm they cause.” “employees are making the actual thing that inflicts harm while consumers' actions directly cause deadly harm.” I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t be voting with our wallets and…

> Replace “tech” in this scenario with “ammunition”. Does your argument still hold up?

Can you explain why you think it wouldn't?

Tons of principled engineers choose not to pursue opportunities at military contractors, for instance, and this is not widely seen as unreasonable.

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#294

Post by hackable_sand »

sham1 wrote: post #166
xp84 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if we believe that those shootings are completely unacceptable (probably criminal), but that “have no immigration enforcement and permanently halt deportations” is also unacceptable? The latter seems to be the solution being pushed by one party. Like always, the left’s problem is that their proposed solutions read like they were written by teenagers, based on emotions and dismissive of the reasons why their supp…

I'll be honest, I don't think I've ever actually heard someone give a reason why the US having open borders would be a bad thing. You are a country of immigrants, and your greatness was built upon that foundation. Yet now it's getting undone for seemingly no reason. But I hope that there would actually be one, so please enlighten me and the other commenters.

There is no defensible reason.

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#295

Post by [deleted] »

account42 wrote: post #241
blurbleblurble wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It is an interesting and somewhat macabre parlor game to play at a large gathering of [hackernews readers]: to speculate who in a showdown would go Nazi." https://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/

Resorting to goodwin is an admission that you have no better argument.

[deleted]

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#296

Post by hackable_sand »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #288
ianbutler wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't lump me in that "we". I did no such thing. I know exactly how it could be abused and have spent 12 years intentionally not working for companies that perpetuate it.

Good for you What are you doing to organize around that? Or is it just “I decided to leave so my hands are clean” self adoration?

Passive resistance is still resistance.

It's the gateway to any sympathetic contingency.

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#297

Post by hackable_sand »

subscribed wrote: post #259
dmantis wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. While trying to degoogling, removing most proprietary software and use sandboxing for everything that's still needed as proprietary, you would often hear that stupid pro-surveillance thesis: "oh, what's wrong in someone trying to show you relevant things in the internet to buy by your interests?". Maybe now some people would think about it. That giving someone's leverage over youself is a ticking bomb until…

"what's wrong? Oh, it literally paints a target on your face that can be shot at if you happen to be brown". Maybe the answers must be blunt and unpleasant.

Huh?

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#298

Post by AndrewKemendo »

hackable_sand wrote: post #296
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good for you What are you doing to organize around that? Or is it just “I decided to leave so my hands are clean” self adoration?

Passive resistance is still resistance. It's the gateway to any sympathetic contingency.

Where’s the passive resistance?

This user is still on twitter and actively promoting their handle there

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#299

Post by AlecSchueler »

torben-friis wrote: post #205
nosianu wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those using memes along the lines of "nobody is illegal" (sometimes "on stolen land" is added)? This is a movement not limited to the US. Here in Europe there is a similar movement, using that same slogan. They don't want any borders or border enforcement at all. Merely for illustration, a single example: https://abc7.com/post/protests-expected-socal-part-nationwid... > Protesters were seen carrying flags, signs and…

>"nobody is illegal" This is completely orthogonal to the conversation, but I think you misunderstood that slogan. It does not mean “immigration rules must not be enforced”. It means differentiating between a potentially illegal action (illegal entry/overstaying) and the person itself. You never talk about an illegal driver, or an illegal drinker, but people talk about illegal immigrants, with the implication that th…

> but people talk about illegal immigrants

Worse than that, we more and more often just see the term "illegals" being used, which completely removes the person from the description.

Re: ICE seeks industry input on ad tech location data for investigative use

#300

Post by belorn »

stephantul wrote: post #111
ianbutler wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that expecting the public to reason through the myriad n-order effects that were going to happen from the whiplash of technology in the last 30 years is a little much. However, I think a lot of people in tech could and did see those consequences coming and were pretty vocal about it. So, I don't think we all did stand by, we exercised what limited power we had. I don't want to seem accusatory here and I don't…

You are right, I do acknowledge their efforts but did not do so here, which I should have. I don't necessarily mean to berate the public, but rather the politicians, who saw that they could use social media/big tech for their own personal gain, and the media, who went along with the narrative that putting all our public communication into privately owned platforms was good for democracy. And maybe our own governments…

Several years ago in Stockholm (2014) during a conference focus on the Internet, the Chief Technology Officer for Barack Obama's 2012 re-election campaign held a talk on how they revolutionary the campaign process by using targeted advertisement campaign on social networks, mostly Facebook, and how effective the technique was to reach voters during fund raising and getting their voters to vote. In their view, this was the first major use of social media during an election. The talk is still available on Youtube for those interested. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3WS9bs3Aps)

There are also articles from 2011 where political commenters noted how the Obama campaign broke new ground using targeted Facebook advertisement and outreach, and how EU politicians could learn from it. The many smaller, but in total larger donations given to Obama was contrasted with Hillary Clinton who had larger individual donations but less in total, and the commenters attributed this to the use of Facebook and finding and meeting a younger audience on those online platforms.

People thought that targeted advertisement was a good thing and politicians looked on the techniques from that election and saw the potential for power. It was mostly just those privacy advocates, free software advocates and security experts that expressed doubt and warned about the dangers.

Post reply on HN