Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday May 13 2015, @10:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the we-await-the-shitstorm dept.

I'm about to give up.

On the one hand, I see countless people get loyalty cards and enjoy discounts on their purchases. They connect with friends on Facebook and Twitter. They use apps on android or apple smartphones to give them turn-by-turn directions, find out where their friends are, or find places of interest. Their e-mail is "in the cloud" where they can get to it from multiple places. They use services like dropbox to share files. They get their news on-line and read e-books. I could go on and on.

On the other hand, I see opportunities for tracking and profiling in every one of those activities. So much so that it seems like one would be under constant observation and surveillance. We are just data points to be sliced and diced and marketed to — a society of consumers rather than customers.

So, I've got a major "ick factor" knowing about these practices and yet I'm hard-pressed to explain any negative consequences to otherwise intelligent people. "I don't do anything that's THAT interesting." "I've done nothing wrong, so I don't worry about it." "I like getting the bonuses and discounts."

Yet, I see companies expend great amounts of money implementing tracking mechanisms such as cookies, super-cookies, clear gifs, as well as huge databases of purchases, travels, and interests. I don't believe they are doing this for purely philanthropic reasons.

In no particular order, I include these for consideration:

I use a variety of Addons while browsing the web using Pale Moon: a custom HOSTS file, Self-Destructing Cookies, Ad-Block Plus, Ghostery, NoScript, Better Privacy, Flashblock, and Ref Control. I have a firewall and use anti-virus products. "In real life" I prefer to use cash over charge cards for my purchases. I have no loyalty cards.

What say you Soylentils? Am I being unreasonably paranoid? Or not paranoid enough? What dangers, really, are there? Why not sign up for all those loyalty cards and social apps? What privacy protections do YOU use?

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Wednesday May 13 2015, @10:47AM

    by Nerdfest (80) on Wednesday May 13 2015, @10:47AM (#182310)

    I don't worry too much about most of the information I share but I think that it's very important that we retain the ability to have the privacy we wish (whether we use it or not at any specific time), as well as the knowledge of the downsides of giving up your privacy.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by martyb on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:01PM

    by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:01PM (#182326) Journal

    I don't worry too much about most of the information I share but I think that it's very important that we retain the ability to have the privacy we wish (whether we use it or not at any specific time), as well as the knowledge of the downsides of giving up your privacy.

    I'm genuinely curious — what ARE the "downsides of giving up your privacy"?

    --
    Wit is intellect, dancing.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:23PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:23PM (#182328)

      Things no one will tell you about if they happen. Your interest rate being higher due to some information the credit rating agency found about you which happens to be statistically highly correlated with doing dangerous activities (you yourself don't do those activities, but the statistics says you probably do; bad luck for you). Your health insurance being more expensive because there's this record of you buying large amounts of alcoholics (which you bought for a friend who was giving a big party — but that fact cannot be found in the database). The online shop showing you higher prices than it shows to the guy next door because their analysis suggests you've got money to spend, and tend to buy also higher-priced items. Another online shop omitting cheaper items on your search for exactly the same reason. You not getting some job because of that photo of you in front of a collection of beer bottles on your facebook page which the prospective employer found (from your visit of a beer bottle museum, but unfortunately he got the photo on a Google Image search, without the context).

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:54PM (#182339)

        > The online shop showing you higher prices than it shows to the guy next door because their analysis suggests you've got money to spend, and tend to buy also higher-priced items.

        FYI: On Orbitz, Mac Users Steered to Pricier Hotels [wsj.com]

      • (Score: 5, Interesting) by The Archon V2.0 on Wednesday May 13 2015, @03:56PM

        by The Archon V2.0 (3887) on Wednesday May 13 2015, @03:56PM (#182434)

        And because most of this data is kept in various aggregated databases with no oversight, there is absolutely no route for complaint or correction. Hypothetical:

        1) LazyCollector Inc gets you and your father conflated because you have the same name (plus or minus a "Jr.") and lived under the same roof a few years ago. When you move your new address just gets added as a second address on the combined entry.

        2) This year your dad has a heart attack and starts looking up info online, has to call a cardiac specialist regularly. LazyCollector buys his search history from the ISP, his cellphone metadata from the phone company. They note this and conclude rightly that the owner of the phone and PC had a heart attack, but affix it to the combined person in their database.

        3) LazyCollector sells info to HealthAggregator Ltd, a data service specializing in medical info, who strip out some of the irrelevant stuff and combine it with the address & other info they bought from BankingInfoCollector Inc. Now as far as HealthAggregator is concerned, the guy with your name who cashes the paychecks you earn has heart problems.

        4) Your health insurer bought from HealthAggregator and their actuaries see, via your banking info you had to give them when you signed up, that you have heart problems and suddenly start treating you like someone with heart problems. (And at your age, that's sign of severe problems.)

        Who do you complain to? You've never heard of HealthAggregator before and the guy at the insurer likely hasn't either; even if he did he doesn't know they buy info from someone like LazyCollector who half-assed it, and HealthAggregator obviously isn't going to tell you their suppliers or even give you the time of day - you're not their customer. And while you're getting a needless electrocardiogram done to prove to your insurer that your heart is fine, LazyCollector is selling that same database to 10 other companies, a few of which you might have future dealings with. And no matter how many times it crops up, you'll never find out it's coming from LazyCollector because they are buried under multiple levels of reselling and abstraction.

        OK, maybe the scenario's a bit obnoxious, but here's a question: Have you ever heard of Acxiom? Because they've heard of you.

        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @06:09PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @06:09PM (#182507)

          In the past it happens.

          Buying first house. My father, brothers and I all lived within 60 miles. Our first names all began with the same letter. My father and I have the same name, but I have middle name and he does not. All of us (7 in all) wives' had variations of similar names. My wife and my father shared the same brith date.

          When the bank pulled my credit reports (they tried once per system) each was over 100 pages long! After going through, the first 3 pages and noting to who each item belonged. I gave it back to them to do the work. Via it found relatives that also lived in area that we did not.

          To this day using Anywho. I am 1 of 3 people in the us with my first and last names. So I am rare but look at the mess it can cause. My brothers continue with first initial thing for there kids.

          • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:31PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:31PM (#182705)

            All of us (7 in all) wives' had variations of similar names

            8-) Was there an avalanche involved in that? [wikipedia.org]

            .
            A quote I appreciate that was missing from the summary:
            "You have no privacy. Get over it."
              --Scott McNeely, CEO of Sun Microsystems, 1999
            Right on the facts, wrong on the attitude [wikipedia.org]

            -- gewg_

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14 2015, @12:42AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14 2015, @12:42AM (#182735)

            " I am J. Spartacus!"

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @01:31PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @01:31PM (#182357)

      Is that a serious question?

      The government could identify you as a person of interest and you find yourself on the bad side of our legal system, even if you did nothing truly wrong. Even if they don't succeed, the entire experience will likely leave severe mental scars and possibly property damage (depending on how they searched your property). The government could (And this has been attempted many times. For example, MLK and the warrantless wiretapping.) destroy people who challenge the status quo. Since the government has to maintain some level of secrecy, we need whistleblowers to tell us ("us" meaning The People, not some officially-approved channel that sweeps things under the rug.) when the government is doing something wrong. Mass surveillance threatens whistleblowers because it makes it far more simple for the government to find and destroy them before they can inform us of the government's wrongdoing, which undermines democracy and human rights. It enables corrupt people in the government to harass people of interest (such as ex lovers). It enables future police states by handing everything over to them on a silver platter when they emerge.

      This is all true even if you give up your privacy yourself, because as we've seen, the government will just retrieve all of your surrendered information from these companies; businesses are almost always all too happy to comply. And I would argue that having your privacy violated is harm in and of itself, and your information flowing to people you didn't want it to flow to is inevitable when you give up your privacy. This includes the government and other companies, no matter what they tell you.

      As for what companies themselves can do to you, the other guy's reply is good.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Wednesday May 13 2015, @02:51PM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday May 13 2015, @02:51PM (#182399) Journal

        Don't forget the NY City cop, Gilberto Valle who used a Federal database to stalk women he planned to kill and eat -- the conviction has been overturned, but not on the database charges. Anyway, the women he stalked -- I believe he even had lunch or met with one -- may have had an internet history comprised solely of watching cat videos. What people fail to realize is that the risks of pervasive surveillance are not limited to being caught being bad. It gives bad people power over you even if you are a Miss Priss 40 yo virgin who won't say "darn."

        I have to get ready for work, so I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to find better citations -- obviously the cannibal part of the story gets all the news play, not the part that reveals how a public service worker abused our surveillance state to either engage in cannibalism or the fantasy of cannibalism:

        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/12/nypd-cannibalism-cop-guilty-verdict [theguardian.com]
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2831130/Sentencing-set-ex-officer-dubbed-Cannibal-Cop.html [dailymail.co.uk]

        • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:21PM

          by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:21PM (#182701)

          What people fail to realize is that the risks of pervasive surveillance are not limited to being caught being bad.

          Those women deserved it, for behaving in such a provocative manner. I don't have to worry about that -- I'm not very tasty, plus I'm mostly gristle, anyway.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @02:20PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @02:20PM (#182382)

      An ex-coworker, ex-lover, or college classmate who happens to work at TheSocialNetwork.com decides to have a look at your browsing/purchasing/phone call/forum posting activity just for yucks.

      A company hires a PI to do a background check on you, and someone at the PI firm discovers some curious stuff in your background and stashes it away for future reference. And possible blackmailing opportunity.

      You decide to run for public office. Bad idea; journalists have bugged and wiretapped politicians for ages.

      You start a company and somehow strike it rich, and now you're a minor celebrity. See above.

    • (Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday May 13 2015, @03:33PM

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Wednesday May 13 2015, @03:33PM (#182424)

      I don't know. Post your SSN and bank account numbers here and we will get back to you on this.

      Also, let us know about your family details, sexual orientation, religion, home address and if you have ever made any comments supporting any of the following: Socialism, Gun Rights, Censorship, Video Games, Political Parties, Edward Snowden, Fox News, Feminism.

      I kid, of course. But remember, just because you think that there is no harm in making something public, doesn't mean someone else will not cause harm just because... people are dicks.

      I have an intentionally boring online life. Unless someone has a vendetta against java developers or amateur astronomers or people that play Faster Than Light, I think I am safe from some psycho trying to ruin my life. (Ok, I am an atheist, and though I don't know a single person IRL that gives a shit either way, I can see people online trying to get me fired or ruin my credit score just because of who I am. Good luck with that, jackasses.) I have a common name and live in a boring middle sized city, I could probably tell you both and it would not help much in finding my actual identity. That being said, I think I will not risk it. :)

      That being said, there is no way there will be any connection between my nitehawk214 Soylent account and my real identity. A quick google search shows links to a Slashdot user with the same username. (That bastard stole my username!)

      I am sure someone could do it, simply forge a subpoena to get the ip address of this comment from Soylent, then ask the provider. I bet nobody even checks to see if those things are real.

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by FakeBeldin on Wednesday May 13 2015, @04:43PM

      by FakeBeldin (3360) on Wednesday May 13 2015, @04:43PM (#182455) Journal

      All the other replies to your question are true in at least one case or another. The underlying theme is that you cannot oversee the consequences. You don't know what is revealed about you, and you don't know who has access to those revelations.

      Case in point:
      - revealing: Teen pregnancy hidden from girl's father, but not from supermarket [forbes.com]
      - access: An investigation of medicine stolen from firefighter departments causes a medicine abuse investigation for persons not connected with the original case [arstechnica.co.uk]
        (DA charged the victim after about a year, then offered plea bargains, then ended dropping the case).

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14 2015, @02:56AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14 2015, @02:56AM (#182772)
      NPR (National Public Radio) posted May 8, 2015, broadcast May 13, 2015:
      Being A Loyal Auto Insurance Customer Can Cost You [npr.org]

      Summary: Insurance companies use tracking data to determine if you ( meaning YOU specifically; not the editorial "you" in general ) will likely shop around for a better deal with another provider if they raise your premium rates beyond a certain point. Thus using personal tracking data to maximize the amount of money they can get from each individual. Getting "loyalty" discounts is a sham; if you stay with them you get 10% discount, but they raise your rates 25%. If you shop around (web and phone) then they will not raise your rates, or at least not raise them as much to prevent you from switching to another provider.

      Given that it is likely all the other providers of any service currently do likewise, or will do so in the near future, I think now is the time to actually write scripts/plugins/apps to continuously surf during device idle time all the webpages of providers of services I use.