The core issue with data privacy is the enforcement mechanism. Yes, there are huge demands for limits on the business world's use of private data.<p>But at the end of the day, any company that has your name/address/credit card number because you bought something from them is going to <i>know</i>. A lot. It's unlikely that any data inside said company isn't going to be de facto visible to them for whatever purposes that company so desires.<p>I find the effort to try to stop the inflow of data to these second parties Sisyphean. It's also ironic that it directly contrasts to the new widespread regime permeating all of financial services, "know your customer."<p>What would be far more effective, and helpful for ensuring user privacy however, are restrictions on <i>transferring</i> that data between second parties, and third parties. Legally binding "no transferring user/customer data to third parties, ever," restrictions would so easy.<p>Simple, enforceable (because the very fact it ends up in a third party creates a paper trail) and a huge improvement.<p>Take HIPAA and apply it to all data.<p>Most of the problems in this space don't come from the company who originally collected the data misbehaving. They come from that data being passed through third parties like a game of pass the parcel.<p>Re recommendation algorithms, the rules should be very simple. All publicly deployed recommendation algorithms should be public knowledge.<p>Recommendation algorithms hold <i>far</i> too much power and influence in our society to remain as secretive corporate IP.
It proposes contextual ads, free from targeting, as the solution so we can have our future that’s free from manipulation.<p>In the 90s, ads weren’t targeted and they were still causing eating disorders. There was lively discussion about the effects this was having in society in many ways. It’s just so much worse now so the discussion has moved on, but it’s not like mass scale, industrialized, trillion dollar manipulation systems (ads) are a good thing.<p>We don’t even talk about consumerism any more because the ads created a culture of consumers who don’t even question it any more
I'd like a future without manipulation. That is, a future in which we can have honest, horizontal discussions about conflicting interests and not let plutocracy and kyriarchy rule society.<p>However, i find it funny that this page with presumably basic information requires me to fill a CAPTCHA and enable cookies. Training the AI minions of our Silicon Valley overlords and tracking cookies both sound like pathways to a future with manipulation :-)
All ads are a form of manipulation. I can see a case that targeted ads are <i>less</i> manipulative to the extent it presents you ads for products you’ve already shown a propensity for. Untargeted ads on the other hand would need to more manipulative to be equally effective.<p>It seems the problem this site is really taking issue with is privacy.
To be honest, if I'm going to see ads anyway, I rather them at least try to be relevant and not random. However, the current situation is out of balance. If my browser is loading an insane amount of tracking networks and my memory/cpu keeps climbing up because of that, and the page requires an epilepsy warning - that is wrong. There has to be a reality where ads support free services and content and not the other way around.
I made my tool free this year in solidarity:<p><a href="https://www.remarkbox.com/remarkbox-is-now-pay-what-you-can/" rel="nofollow">https://www.remarkbox.com/remarkbox-is-now-pay-what-you-can/</a>
We need more of those websites showing the normies that "having nothing to hide" is essentially not true unless you're a toddler. Ever negotiated a salary, an insurance, a business contract? In life we get what we negotiate, not what we deserve and when it comes to negotiations information is power.
Before this all began, we declared independence [0]. This approach is merely pleading for freedom.<p>Somehow the Snowcrash faction seem to be winning over the Cypherpunk visionaries. The former envisioned a largely dystopian technological future where in-the-know people enjoy benefits and avoid downsides, whereas the latter attempted to enable unfettered growth.<p>Where is the modern herald call for throwing off tech designed to subvert the individual?<p>[0] <a href="https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence" rel="nofollow">https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence</a>
We wanted a world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries, a world where anything is possible. Are we settling for "a future without manipulation" instead?
Today I saw an article about Roma, claiming genetic data from some of them was collected against their consent (years ago when asking for consent was not formalized like today), and should be deleted. It is used for scientific studies. I think that is madness - if the privacy craze starts to harm science, it should be reconsidered.
Website: Do you surf the web? Choose: "Yes" or "No"<p>Me: Yes<p>Website: Every time you visit a website or use social media apps, you are being tracked and monitored. There is often no warning that this is happening. Choose: "Oh no! Tell me more!" or "I'm fine with it..."<p>Me: I'm fine with it...<p>Website: Are you sure you do not want to know what happens when you use social media, accept cookies or like a post? Choose: "Ok. Tell me more!"<p>Me: Ah, yes, I don't know why I expected anything other than eurocrats using UI dark patterns to try and force me to accept their propagandistic messaging. Totally on brand. <i>Closes tab</i>