Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 718

Author
Time

So…

Facebook.

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time

Handman said:

So…

Facebook.

So…

Aged politicians who probably think internet technology looks like this. 😛

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

In recent weeks, I keep hearing politicians and journalists saying this online data protection issue is difficult, or impossible to solve. Is forcing online companies by law to give people a genuine opt out of 3rd party data sharing really that difficult?

I’m sure if Facebook (using them as an example) surveyed all of their users and asked “would you like us to share and/or sell your private data to 3rd parties?” 0% would say yes. Yet 100% of their users have agreed to let Facebook do exactly that because it’s not possible to opt out of it and still use their service.

Simply make it illegal for these companies to share data without the express permission of the user and make it illegal to make that permission conditional on continued use of said service. I don’t know about other countries but in the UK data-protection for customers in the real-world is serious sh*t that companies can get in trouble for. So why is it okay for companies in the online world to act like it’s the wild west with people’s privacy?

It doesn’t even need to be on an international basis (it would be better if it was through), individual countries can legislate on this and the companies will obey the laws in those countries like they do across real-world borders because they want to do business in those countries.

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

^What I wanted to hear. It would be interesting to see how it would affect their business strategy, there is big bucks in sharing this data. In fact, I think that’s where most of these social media companies value lie.

Also, legislation was recently introduced that would do just that: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2520

However, it is still stuck in committee hell.

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time

Handman said:

^What I wanted to hear. It would be interesting to see how it would affect their business strategy, there is big bucks in sharing this data. In fact, I think that’s where most of these social media companies value lie.

The effect on their bottom line is not important. Many other highly profitable ways of making money are already illegal for good reasons. This should be one of them.

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TM2YC said:

Handman said:

^What I wanted to hear. It would be interesting to see how it would affect their business strategy, there is big bucks in sharing this data. In fact, I think that’s where most of these social media companies value lie.

The effect on their bottom line is not important. Many other highly profitable ways of making money are already illegal for good reasons. This should be one of them.

I’m just curious how it would effect the companies, seeing as Silicon Valley is seen as a goldmine. That would probably change for social media companies. Twitter has also been having money problems lately, this might do them in.

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time

TM2YC said:

In recent weeks, I keep hearing politicians and journalists saying this online data protection issue is difficult, or impossible to solve. Is forcing online companies by law to give people a genuine opt out of 3rd party data sharing really that difficult?

I’m sure if Facebook (using them as an example) surveyed all of their users and asked “would you like us to share and/or sell your private data to 3rd parties?” 0% would say yes. Yet 100% of their users have agreed to let Facebook do exactly that because it’s not possible to opt out of it and still use their service.

Simply make it illegal for these companies to share data without the express permission of the user and make it illegal to make that permission conditional on continued use of said service. I don’t know about other countries but in the UK data-protection for customers in the real-world is serious sh*t that companies can get in trouble for. So why is it okay for companies in the online world to act like it’s the wild west with people’s privacy?

It doesn’t even need to be on an international basis (it would be better if it was through), individual countries can legislate on this and the companies will obey the laws in those countries like they do across real-world borders because they want to do business in those countries.

Totally agree.

Fight the real enemy!

Author
Time

Unfortunately, the current political climate (white house, senate, congress - and soon the supreme court) is to deregulate everything, especially the internet, so that mega-billionaires can become as rich as possible. That is not compatible with requiring companies to waste their time with annoyances like protecting consumers’ personal data.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time

TM2YC said:

In recent weeks, I keep hearing politicians and journalists saying this online data protection issue is difficult, or impossible to solve. Is forcing online companies by law to give people a genuine opt out of 3rd party data sharing really that difficult?

I’m sure if Facebook (using them as an example) surveyed all of their users and asked “would you like us to share and/or sell your private data to 3rd parties?” 0% would say yes. Yet 100% of their users have agreed to let Facebook do exactly that because it’s not possible to opt out of it and still use their service.

Simply make it illegal for these companies to share data without the express permission of the user and make it illegal to make that permission conditional on continued use of said service. I don’t know about other countries but in the UK data-protection for customers in the real-world is serious sh*t that companies can get in trouble for. So why is it okay for companies in the online world to act like it’s the wild west with people’s privacy?

It doesn’t even need to be on an international basis (it would be better if it was through), individual countries can legislate on this and the companies will obey the laws in those countries like they do across real-world borders because they want to do business in those countries.

Totally agree. The sad fact of the world is that you sometimes have to save people from themselves. Hell I’m all about privacy and yet I have a Facebook page.

We live in a time where all of this is still relatively “new” and politics and politicians and legislation hasn’t really caught up to the jump in technology, and we’re going to see (hopefully in our lifetimes) a change to that someday.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

Author
Time

Tyrphanax said:

TM2YC said:

In recent weeks, I keep hearing politicians and journalists saying this online data protection issue is difficult, or impossible to solve. Is forcing online companies by law to give people a genuine opt out of 3rd party data sharing really that difficult?

I’m sure if Facebook (using them as an example) surveyed all of their users and asked “would you like us to share and/or sell your private data to 3rd parties?” 0% would say yes. Yet 100% of their users have agreed to let Facebook do exactly that because it’s not possible to opt out of it and still use their service.

Simply make it illegal for these companies to share data without the express permission of the user and make it illegal to make that permission conditional on continued use of said service. I don’t know about other countries but in the UK data-protection for customers in the real-world is serious sh*t that companies can get in trouble for. So why is it okay for companies in the online world to act like it’s the wild west with people’s privacy?

It doesn’t even need to be on an international basis (it would be better if it was through), individual countries can legislate on this and the companies will obey the laws in those countries like they do across real-world borders because they want to do business in those countries.

Totally agree. The sad fact of the world is that you sometimes have to save people from themselves. Hell I’m all about privacy and yet I have a Facebook page.

But that’s my point. You didn’t have the option to save yourself. It was use the service and get screwed, or not use the service. Things like facebook, twitter, youtube and google are facts of life now. Asking people to choose between being able to use them at all and a vague possibility that their data might be used by a “trusted” 3rd party, is not a fair choice.

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time

TM2YC said:

Tyrphanax said:

TM2YC said:

In recent weeks, I keep hearing politicians and journalists saying this online data protection issue is difficult, or impossible to solve. Is forcing online companies by law to give people a genuine opt out of 3rd party data sharing really that difficult?

I’m sure if Facebook (using them as an example) surveyed all of their users and asked “would you like us to share and/or sell your private data to 3rd parties?” 0% would say yes. Yet 100% of their users have agreed to let Facebook do exactly that because it’s not possible to opt out of it and still use their service.

Simply make it illegal for these companies to share data without the express permission of the user and make it illegal to make that permission conditional on continued use of said service. I don’t know about other countries but in the UK data-protection for customers in the real-world is serious sh*t that companies can get in trouble for. So why is it okay for companies in the online world to act like it’s the wild west with people’s privacy?

It doesn’t even need to be on an international basis (it would be better if it was through), individual countries can legislate on this and the companies will obey the laws in those countries like they do across real-world borders because they want to do business in those countries.

Totally agree. The sad fact of the world is that you sometimes have to save people from themselves. Hell I’m all about privacy and yet I have a Facebook page.

But that’s my point. You didn’t have the option to save yourself. It was use the service and get screwed, or not use the service. Things like facebook, twitter, youtube and google are facts of life now. Asking people to choose between being able to use them at all and a vague possibility that their data might be used by a “trusted” 3rd party, is not a fair choice.

Yeah, I was coming at this from the angle of “people can opt out by not using the service,” but that’s akin to victim blaming and, as you said, these services are a fact of life at this point, so putting the onus on consumers to do the changing is definitely not fair. I guess I hadn’t really thought it through well enough.

I know a few people I quite like who I would lose contact with completely due to distance if I just deleted my Facebook account (as tempting as it always is), and I’m sure many other people are in the same boat. Like I was saying, we’re at a moment in history were this technology is new enough and has quickly proliferated global society before we had a chance to really understand the ramifications of it, but hopefully a change is coming soon.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

Author
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Unfortunately, the current political climate (white house, senate, congress - and soon the supreme court) is to deregulate everything, especially the internet, so that mega-billionaires can become as rich as possible. That is not compatible with requiring companies to waste their time with annoyances like protecting consumers’ personal data.

Ugh…fucking this…

ChainsawAsh disappears a lot - bkev

Author
Time

For now we’ll just have to take efforts to police our own data. Make sure you never give apps permission to access phone data, always keep the privacy settings as strict as possible, etc. etc. It won’t stop all of this but it will at least protect you from the worst of it.

Fight the real enemy!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

An option for some may be to go back to ‘dumbphones’ / ‘feature’ phones… seems they are on the rise somewhat of late - could be nostalgia from early phone like Razr or the 3310 etc. Could also be the breakdown of trust (ie apple’s slowdown of it’s devices and also this data sharing/slurping), or other reasons - like no contract, cheap to buy, a sturdier phone with longer battery - especially useful for someone not on social media or wants to use (or update) 200 apps anyway 😃

A few dumphones have FM radio or SD cards slots for mp3 playback, a camera too, and are also dust-resistant or ‘splash-proof’.
 

That’s not to say what facebook and google etc have done shouldn’t be challenged of course, or our privacy choices and settings should be made clearer or have more protection. When you hear that 46 of the 55 Members of the House and Senate committees questioning Zuckerberg have received funds from facebook previously… the cynic in me leans towards this all being a bit for show - what will actually change? once the uproar dies down? - a bit like phone hacking & the now axed 2nd part of the Leveson Inquiry in the UK… (I obviously hope to proved wrong on this).

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here?

Author
Time

I finally went back to my Motorola Razr this year, after bitching about my smartphone for five years!

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Handman said:

I finally went back to my Motorola Razr this year, after bitching about my smartphone for five years!

I had a Droid RAZR M, two phones ago. I liked it so much I stuck with Motorola since then.
Droid RAZR M -> Droid Turbo -> Moto Z Play

Z Play is a midrange phone, but it has wonderful battery life. The Turbo was reported to have the largest mAh battery of its generation, but its specs ate up a lot of power so as to make the claim fairly irrelevant.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Oh, you misunderstood me. By Motorola Razr, I mean…

A Motorola Razr.

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time

Fuck the public.

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Your Razr still works? Tracfone obsoleted my trusty decade old Motorola flip phone when all the 2G networks were being phased out. They sent me a free LG flipper as a replacement, but I can’t do the Captain Kirk communicator flip with it.

I finally caved and got a smart phone this year, but I don’t trust it to do anything beyond simple web browsing. I won’t even log into the forum with it. I also freaked out the other day when it seemingly turned it’s wi-fi on all by itself and connected when I was at a restaurant where I used wi-fi before. The person I was dining with had an app on his iPhone seemingly start up by itself at the same time.

Stuff like this could make me really paranoid.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I use Verizon, and I think it uses 3G. I’ll enjoy it while it lasts, they don’t make flip phones like this anymore.

The Captain Kirk flip used to be a real ice breaker.

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time

It’s no razr, but ZTE actually makes a flip smart phone. I was lucky to find one locally.

I’ve had a couple people take notice when I’m using the touch screen and ask me where to get one.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?