SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the something-for-your-blood-pressure dept.
Under the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) any ordinary online Joe or Jeanette has the right to know which data are gathered about his/her activities. What's more, if a site wants to share those data with a third-party, it also has to clearly inform ya about those other companies, who in turn have to inform you about which personal data they're processing, with whom they're sharing those data and so on.
In short, turtles all the way down.
Yet that's a concept that apparently has zoomed right past the well-educated heads of such obscure companies like Oracle, Acxiom, Criteo, Equifax, Experian, Quantcast and Tapiad: just some of the data processors at the heart of the commercialized Internet.
Let's take a look at just two of them: Oracle and Acxiom.
Oracle [Data Cloud] sorts individuals into thousands of categories, based on more than 30,000 data attributes including newspaper readership, dieting, weight, ethnicity, charitable causes, online dating, politics [Pro 2nd Amendment Voters, Fiscally Conservative/Liberal, Likely Pro-Choice, Likely Supportive of Same Sex Marriage] and so on for 2 billion consumer profiles (drawn from 1,500 data partners).
Acxiom claims to cover 700 million people, with for example more than 3,500 specific behavioural insights for over 90% of UK households [Alcohol at Home, Heavy Spenders, Interest in Going to the Pub], while drumming its chest about its Personicx lifestage segmentation system and its LiveRamp IdentityLink: an identity graph which matches email and postal addresses, cookies, deviceIDs and, of course, phone numbers to individual 'consumers', merging both online and offline data.
They must be slightly envious towards Facebook's 52,000 personal attributes and 1.9 billion users.
Their curiosity piqued by such wildly optimistic messaging, the people at Privacy International decided to try out their rights under the GDPR. With some funny results: e.g. a data broker returning personal data as been provided by another data broker -- but that other data broker [Oracle] referring to an online (what else) tool only returning a blank stare. At least they made an effort, there: obtaining user consent was an interesting concept, for them data brokers do-gooders.
On November 8, Privacy International contacted data protection authorities in France, Ireland and the UK, and filed complaints against the 7 data brokers [Acxiom, Oracle], ad-tech companies (Criteo, Quantcast, Tapad) and credit referencing agencies (Equifax, Experian) mentioned.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:27AM (3 children)
does the eu and its puppet governments apply the gdpr to themselves?
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Thursday November 15 2018, @03:54AM (2 children)
Except when political campaigns do it. The law specifically grants politicians the right to spam your phone with recorded messages at all hours of the day or not.
Most labor laws here in the US don't apply to Congress.
I would expect the EU Parliament to be similarly forward-thinking.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Spamalope on Thursday November 15 2018, @05:54AM (1 child)
However it's legal for US telcos to accept forged Caller-ID info from robocallers. So, are they doing the same thing they did with spammers? aka getting paid to look the other way and/or facilitate the telemarketing to folks on the do not call list?
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Friday November 16 2018, @02:14AM
No. It appears that federal law or regulation requires them to connect phone calls that they receive from another (possibly competing) telephone company, no matter whether it's spam.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Fluffeh on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:29AM (1 child)
Isn't it always funny how when regulations come in, it's such a chore to business and companies - making the slightest change to their business model or procedures is wrought with hardship and challenge. Of course, when it comes to making a profit or bringing a new product to market, they are the nimble and agile leaders of the field. No challenge is too difficult, no leap too long and no problem too complex.
While I tend to lean towards "less is better" when it comes to regulation in general, at times I see this sort of paltry effort being made and start leaning towards more regulation and stricter fines for corporations abusing the average person.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:51AM
I'm able to change my personal workflow fairly easily, but when ms or google changes how their products work it really throws me off for a while
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:31AM (4 children)
What if your local police department is accessing all of that data? Is that a "good thing" for you? (We already know that many police departments have a Facebook presence.)
What about your local grocer? Do you want him accessing everything the data giants have amassed on you?
Your local school board?
Or, at the next election, do you want "the other side" broadcasting some of the more embarrassing details of your life? Or the life of your candidate?
Can your employer access all those data?
How about a representative of a gang?
All of those rat bastard data brokers are selling the data for profit. Who will they sell to, and who will they not sell to? We've already seen that mega-corp (such as Apple) will cooperate with oppressive regimes to rat out dissidents (such as China). What do we think is going to happen when the oppressive regime is in Washington, or London, or Paris?
I've downloaded the PDF in TFS. Don't have time to read it right now, but the background for the article goes into the many ways Uber has abused employees and customers. That's enough to get anyone thinking, isn't it? It may be YOU next! In fact, it probably is you. How many "discount cards" have you signed up for?
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Thursday November 15 2018, @03:57AM (1 child)
Whenever I rant about tracking pixels, I usually include "consider the challenges faced by closeted gay right-wing politicians".
One such, a California legislature, was stopped for a citation while driving home from a gay bar. He resigned which I regard as unfortunate: gay right wing politicians would do us all a lot of good were they open about their sexuality.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:46PM
What do you care about a gay right-wing politician? I don't much like any of those Republicans. Oh - wait. Are there still a couple left who are NOT queer? Hmmmm - imagine that. I suppose anything is possible.
I have heard that some of the Libertarians aren't queer. I don't know which ones, or anything. But, they probably aren't far right enough to count.
(Score: 2) by quietus on Thursday November 15 2018, @05:28PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 16 2018, @04:20PM
That PDF is surprising, actually. The massive casualties in Mexico just don't make the news. It's like the US is entirely ignorant of the bloodshed south of the border. I have been mocked right here on SN for citing stories from http://www.borderlandbeat.com/ [borderlandbeat.com] MSM won't cover it, average Joe's deny it, and government seems to have no publicly official position on it.
People are dying by the thousands in this drug war, but it's invisible to anyone who doesn't choose to look. To see a more-or-less official publication from the War College that acknowledges all of this is surprising, almost to the point of being stunning.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by legont on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:33AM (2 children)
Here in the office we know that we can't implement that without everybody implementing it - we'll loose the competition. So the decision was to wait till EU finds an example to fry and see how badly it will be damaged and then adjust accordingly. The idea was that we are relatively less obvious target. I guess the show just started.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:50AM
Careful, Fluffeh will give you more regulations! Loose lips sink ships!
(Score: 2) by quietus on Thursday November 15 2018, @06:41PM
Looking at the Equifax case [ftc.gov], your company must feel pretty comfy then: loosing the private data of 143m Americans seems to have had no effect on their stock price, though the latest estimates [marketwatch.com] put the potential fine at around $275m.
Coincidentally, that must mean your personal data (name, social security number, birth data, address, drivers' license number, credit card numbers, dispute documents with personal identification) are worth about 2 (two) dollars.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday November 15 2018, @03:42AM (7 children)
From the PDF - http://crackedlabs.org/dl/CrackedLabs_Christl_CorporateSurveillance.pdf [crackedlabs.org]
This is one of the darker aspects, that few if any have even thought of.
At least one company keeps it's attention focused on the mood of it's users. How many other corporations do the same? And, how might the mood of the people be manipulated? In days past, the public mood might be manipulated with crude, even vulgar, slogans. "Remember the Alamo", "Remember the Maine", or "If you're not with us, you're against us!". Today? Just think about all of the tools that mass media possesses, with which they might manipulate an entire nation's mood. Need to invade Syria? MSM just coordinates various tools, starting with music, to put the public into a rage. Subliminal messages, subsonics, ultrasonics, and - what else? Might they already be manipulating the public's mood?
Some of us here may be less susceptible to that sort of manipulation - but none of us is completely immune. Take the average Joe and Sally Sixpack. They are like pigs with rings through their noses. Just keep them moderately well fed, yank on that ring, and they'll follow you anywhere. The public.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday November 15 2018, @06:11AM (1 child)
Almost need a +0 Depressing mod.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 3, Touché) by ewk on Thursday November 15 2018, @10:52AM
Make that a +0 Depressing mood. :-)
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @10:02AM
Welcome to the age of the personalized ads and customized efforts to modify your behavior. Brought to you by our centralized internet and clueless, reckless consumers. Russian trolls (among others) need to know your state of mind so they can craft their attack accordingly.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @02:16PM
I don't think there is any question this is going on. Clearly it is already being used for commercial manipulation, at the very least to encourage subscriptions. An easy way to test is to search for music when signed in, vs. not signed in to a site. I listen to a lot of classical. If I don't sign in, pretty much every recommended piece of music is stuff that would be great to commit suicide to. If I log in, I get a variety instead.
Cumulatively this practice constitutes psychological manipulation, that if done by a spouse would be considered legally actionable battery. Which is why when the loons go off the deep end I am generally on their side. People are being harmed by psychological abuse perpetrated by advertisers. It is engineered specifically with that intent. In consequence when somebody goes postal; while certainly unreasonable; you can be assume that the perpetrator actually believes that they are acting in self defense. Indeed in some cases they are acting out in self defense, just in a misdirected way.
We recognize natural human rights in this country. The schism whereby corporations are recognized as people, but are divorced from individual civil liability is facilitating this. Psychological battery is difficult to prove, but even more so when you have a billion dollar advertising industry invading everyones lives insisting that such a thing isn't even possible. Further still, try proving it when a fictitious person is lawfully responsible, while the criminal act was perpetrated by employees on the orders of a bunch of crafty executives.
What there is a lot of responsibility to go around, a big part of this is caused by corporate personhood. Which is a legal doctrine that was invented by SCOTUS in a procedurally unconstitutional way. They've redefined the preamble, and thus the entire meaning of the document without a constitutional amendment. Not that it isn't trivial to crush the argument of corporate personhood in almost every facet of the argument. But none of that even matters because if SCOTUS won't honor constitutional procedure, it forfeits jurisdiction before it even sits the bench.
People are being harmed. They have a right to a defense. The judiciary, by means of its perpetual rhetorical circle jerk, is denying them a right to that defense. Congress can only be relied on to make the problem worse. And that is a part (though how much of a part remains unknown) of the reason people are dying in mass shootings.
There are a number of ways this gets fixed. The least objectionable probably being that courts start recognizing this kind of battery and qui tam litigation makes it an undesirable practice among the current offenders. The most objectionable being the fruit loops start picking better targets. Somewhere in between lies a socialized healthcare system so that more people can get the mental healthcare they need.
Personally I'm for all of the above.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 15 2018, @04:03PM (2 children)
Learn critical thinking first. For example, what's your evidence that complete immunity to every sort of manipulation is desirable?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday November 15 2018, @04:49PM
Are you married? Have you never once felt the complete fool, for having allowed yourself to be manipulated yet again?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 16 2018, @02:54AM
Well,
Eventually critical thinking leads to not just understanding that your being fucked with, but understanding the volume with which you are being fucked with. I can't even watch normal TV anymore, because I spend the whole time picking apart the psychological techniques and brain rape sewn into all the advertising and content. The fact that every show now has a periodic episode where there is a concussion or some excuse for high frequency sounds, isn't an accident. They're using high frequency audio masking to fuck with peoples minds. It also isn't an accident that content and commercials make fun of things like hypnotism and clinical psychology like mental health sciences are all just some evil boogyman.
The science is extensive. We know how a lot of the mind works. Not all of it, but enough to draw some intelligable conclusions. But finding a 12 man jury who isn't suffering the bizarre kind of PTSD these fucks inflict on the public is an unlikely event. Bias against mental health in the U.S. is the flat-earth debate of the modern times. The public has a completely wrong view, and the church (cable TV) is formenting that view because it threatens their control over the publics will. And any reasoned call to correct this, is facing the shit end of a billion dollar propaganda and reputation anhilation machine. Not to mention the most severe dilution of civil rights this country has seen since the Congress ignored slavery in 1789.
Conscious decisions are much less prevalent than they appear.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Apparition on Thursday November 15 2018, @04:00AM (7 children)
... is why I blocked all EU IPs from my little itty bitty online forum, and added a bullet to the user registration agreement where people have to agree that they are not citizens of the EU should they get around the EU IP block. I've seen what it's done to other small online forums with people insisting that they have the right to delete their accounts and all of their posts. Uh uh.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @04:57AM (2 children)
So - signing up is for life? Or longer?
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday November 15 2018, @06:15AM
Life, plus 70 years. Make it match mouse rules.
Or, if you're really mean, make it include you children, and your children's children, (plus 70 years, for the hell of it)
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by Apparition on Friday November 16 2018, @01:31AM
Signing up is for the life of the forum, whether that be five years, ten years, or a thousand years. Not one forum of more than two dozen I'm registered to allows people to delete their accounts. Only a few allow people to delete posts.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @07:04AM
California passed its own mini-GDPR earlier this year, which includes the right to have one's data deleted. Perhaps you need to block Californians too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @08:38AM (2 children)
God forbid people want to delete their accounts ..... oh noes!!
Speaking about deleting accounts, can you delete accounts on SoylentNews?
(Score: 4, Funny) by kazzie on Thursday November 15 2018, @09:08AM (1 child)
I've tried deleting "Anonymous Coward", but it didn't work.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15 2018, @07:10PM
Oh, it did work. We just spawn faster than you can delete.