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

The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–66 of 66 posts

Re: The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

#61

Post by passiveincomelg »

fiiv wrote: post #25
pedalpete wrote: post #4

There are two sides to the 'value' equation here. The telecoms can now sell your data, but that also means that somebody needs to be buying it on the other end. This campaign does a great job of calling out Senators who sold out their voters. I'd like to see us also call out the companies that buy the data from the telecoms. Just because it is legal, doesn't mean it is right. I'm not sure how one would track down who…

You are assuming that this will be easy to find. The most obvious methods that comes to mind: Isolate the purchase to some kind of shell company or chain of shell companies. The sale can go through them and end up in my hands. Also possible that we will see the rise of a data broker, who buys the data and sells it to clients but keeps them anonymous.

The most obvious method is employees in selling or buying companies leaking this information.

Re: The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

#62

Post by alpeb »

blackbagboys wrote: post #45
Kurtz79 wrote: post #5

Off topic, but such a crass title makes me instantly disinterested in whatever the article has to say, even if I'm likely to agree with its content. Is this really the new normal for websites ?

The contempt these politicians have for you and their willingness to trample all over you in the service of the uber-wealthy and powerful is unlimited. Why should they be afforded any respect at all?

Because whenever they go low you should always stay high.

Re: The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

#63

Post by quirkafleeg »

fethrowaway wrote: post #59
quirkafleeg wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the kind of porn you watch doesn't imply what you are attracted to How does it not imply what you're attracted to?

I read a lot of grotesque guro manga. I'm talking decapitations, body mutilation, etc. However I can't stand the sight of real blood and the idea of even "light" guro IRL is a huge turn off. So I'm not really sure I'd say I'm attracted to the idea so much as I get off to the art style? I'm sure there's other examples (eg: women w/ regards to simulated rape videos) where people can get off to porn of it but aren't nec…

Thanks for the reply, the examples (I was only considering more general/mainstream porn) and the apt use of a throwaway for a post like that in a thread on online privacy. :)

Re: The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

#64

Post by jackhack »

Kurtz79 wrote: post #5

Off topic, but such a crass title makes me instantly disinterested in whatever the article has to say, even if I'm likely to agree with its content. Is this really the new normal for websites ?

sadly, I think shock-value is becoming the new norm for much of our culture.

A goal of Hacker News is to avoid this though.

Re: The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

#65

Post by jackhack »

pharrlax wrote: post #19
ingenuous2 wrote: post #3

I am so conflicted. At my core, I believe everyone, regardless of affiliation or beliefs has a right to online privacy. On the other, man do I freaking wish that one of the big porn sites would put up a billboard with the (private) sexual fetishes of these specific elected officials. Edit: I would wish more for the latter if I thought it would change anything.

You know what would be even better? An electronic billboard, where the private sexual fetishes of 1 random constituent are publicly displayed, next to their name. A new unlucky constituent is randomly chosen and displayed every day. At the bottom, a bold red banner reads, "[REPRESENTATIVE NAME] TOOK $XX,XXX FROM THE CABLE INDUSTRY, THEN VOTED TO LET THIS HAPPEN."

I'd rather see the cable industry executives' proclivities broadcast than some random constituent.

Re: The Turds Who Voted to Sell Out Your Online Privacy Get Their Faces Plastered

#66

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

fiiv wrote: post #25
pedalpete wrote: post #4

There are two sides to the 'value' equation here. The telecoms can now sell your data, but that also means that somebody needs to be buying it on the other end. This campaign does a great job of calling out Senators who sold out their voters. I'd like to see us also call out the companies that buy the data from the telecoms. Just because it is legal, doesn't mean it is right. I'm not sure how one would track down who…

You are assuming that this will be easy to find. The most obvious methods that comes to mind: Isolate the purchase to some kind of shell company or chain of shell companies. The sale can go through them and end up in my hands. Also possible that we will see the rise of a data broker, who buys the data and sells it to clients but keeps them anonymous.

> Also possible that we will see the rise of a data broker, w

That people aren't aware that the digitization this is and has been a very lucrative profession for at least 20 years is testament to how, shalll we say, shadowy they are :)

Besides the moral implications, being a data broker sounds like a cool, cyberpunk-esque gig.

Post reply on HN