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

FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 359 posts

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#321

Post by pwillia7 »

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #319
pwillia7 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait --- the emperor isn't wearing any clothes?!?!?

I wouldn't say that. If it meets our needs/wants and we are willing to pay for it, that represents value, no matter how silly it sounds. People pay money for plenty of nonsense: cosmetics, junk food, DLC. The fact that it's artificially derived (laws begetting paid workarounds) doesn't change the value proposition. For data gluttons the investment in data acquisition pays off. There are plenty of people paying money…

Interesting point

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#322

Post by dredmorbius »

notinmykernel wrote: post #311
dredmorbius wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NB: 2013 (as is suggested by the URL).

Do you think this effort was somehow scaled back?

I was only commenting on the publication date. HN tends to give weight to that.

I'm not making any other implication.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#323

Post by pkphilip »

srndsnd wrote: post #31

To me, what's missing from that set of recommendations is some method to increase the liability of companies who mishandle user data. It is insane to me that I can be notified via physical mail of months old data breaches, some of which contained my Social Security number, and that my only recourse is to set credit freezes from multiple credit bureaus.

But reveal any "classified" information about the govt and you will end up in jail. The severe asymmetry between what a citizen can do and what the govt gives itself the right to do is crazy.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#324

Post by runjake »

saagarjha wrote: post #273
runjake wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YMMV, but it took me 15 minutes start to finish to freeze my credit with the 3 bureaus using the following instructions. https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/finance/how-to-freeze-cre...

Ok, but this is something that shouldn't be my problem. And it's not just that; I have to go unfreeze it if someone needs to run a credit check.

Right, but you've got to do what's within your control, unless you're planning a Senate campaign and plan to resist significant and lucrative lobbying operations against you.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#325

Post by throwaway92024 »

night862 wrote: post #271
intended wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the treatment for depression. this argument reduces mental health to medication, which leaves aside everything from the history of mental health (asylums, witch burnings to today), leaps in medicine (from lobotomies, to SNRIs, bipolar meds and more), to simply better diagnoses. There are certainly tons of people here who have benefited from mental health professionals - overextending the flaws in psych si…

I disagree, in brief because the practical side of psychiatry is medication-dominated, mostly because medical research is difficult and expensive. There are some non-medication treatments for some psychiatric symptoms such as those caused by trauma (Prominently, EMDR) that some hail as actual cures, and even maybe depression (I am clearly not a doctor.) but in the case of depression I think you'll find its quite medi…

Ironically, the proposed biological mechanism behind EMDR is totally incorrect, and everyone knows it, outside of some diehard polyvagal theory (also totally bunk) adherents. But the treatments do work for a lot of people, probably because it's just exposure therapy by another name.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#326

Post by throwaway92024 »

positus wrote: post #146
aftbit wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why is it everywhere I go management is always doing shady stuff. Well here's a cynical take on this - management is playing the business game at a higher level than you. "Shady stuff" is the natural outcome of profit motivation. Our society is fundamentally corrupt. It is designed to use the power of coercive force to protect the rights and possessions of the rich against the threat of violence by the poor. The onl…

The problem isn't society or profit motivation. It's people. Humanity itself is corrupt. There aren't "good people" and "bad people". There's only "bad people." We're all bad people, just some of us are more comfortable with our corruption being visible to others to a higher degree.

No. There are no good or bad people. But people do good or bad things, all the time.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#327

Post by jlarocco »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #113
jlarocco wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cognitive dissonance is in the voters and users. Even right here on HN, where most people understand the issue, you'll see conversations and arguments in favor of letting companies vacuum up as much data and user info as they want (without consent or opt-in), while also saying it should be illegal for the government to collect the same data without a warrant. In practice, the corporations and government have foun…

There isn’t a single intellectually honest harm associated with the majority of app telemetry and for almost all ad data collection. Like go ahead and name one. Once you say some vague demographic and bodily autonomy stuff: you know, if you’re going to invoke “voters,” I’ve got bad news for you. Some kinds of hate are popular. So you can’t pick and choose what popular stuff is good or what popular stuff is bad. It ha…

> There isn’t a single intellectually honest harm associated with the majority of app telemetry and for almost all ad data collection. Like go ahead and name one.

The harm is the privacy violation. App telemetry needs to be "opt-in", and people should know who can see the data and how it's being used.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#328

Post by photonthug »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #312
photonthug wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically your argument is everything is fine because consumers can opt out. Another tired old argument where even the people saying it don’t really believe it. You can’t even rent a hotel room without giving them an email and a phone number they don’t need, and are looking to sell. If this works for you.. the person at the counter probably faked it rather than arguing with you. Some people will be happy when menu…

All you have to do is tell me how you are harmed by your email sold for marketing by a hotel room. The flashlight thing sounds like a bad actor that doesn’t have anything to do with anyone’s opinions about privacy, and it doesn’t sound like it has anything to do with Meta or YouTube. I’d be most interested in naming a specific harm in something that their app telemetry does.

I’m harmed because I did not consent to it, and that should really be enough for you. What intellectually honest reason do you have that it’s ok to coerce others into things that they don’t want?

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#329

Post by singleshot_ »

Hugsun wrote: post #276
singleshot_ wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PSA pro tip: they will try to steer you toward “locking” your account. Don’t fall for it. Freeze your account.

Do you know why they do this?

No. I have some guesses. A credit reporting company can probably sell access to their data for good money if the account is locked but not if it is frozen?

Put otherwise if a bank asks experian to look at my credit report and experian tells them to take a hike because my account is frozen, that’s not worth much money to the bank. But that’s the only credit account configuration that has any value to me, so I’ll insist on it.

I think “freezing” and the dynamics thereof are established by federal law, while “locked” is a think the companies made up so they had an account setting that they could provide that would give the illusion of security, while maintaining the ability to sell information associated with the account.

In other words: evil people do evil things when we aren’t paying sufficient attention. It’s our job to hold them accountable.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#330

Post by aftbit »

positus wrote: post #257
ragnese wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're all bad people, just some of us are more comfortable with our corruption being visible to others to a higher degree. If the GP's story is true (and I have no reason to suspect otherwise), then there are clearly differences in the degree of "badness" between people. GP chose to resign from his job, while his manager chose to be negligent and dishonest. So, even if we're all bad people, there are less bad and m…

I understand your perspective, but I maintain that "good" (morally pure) isn't a category any of us belong to. We're all lying, hateful people to one extent or another, and lying hateful people aren't "good", even if we haven't lied or hated as much as other lying, hateful people. "Less evil" isn't synonymous with "good". The argument that profit motivation is the origin of shady business practices ignores the existe…

See also "The Good Place" which is an absolute sleeper of a TV show.
Post reply on HN