Data as an instrument of war

[Hair Warrior]

These articles are very vague as to what data is actually being used. It sounds like the data they're talking about is sanitized or attributed less to an individual and instead to other attributes like phone ID, browser cookies, etc. Whether that is PII when not associated with your name is an interesting. I'd offer that if you associate my street address with my name it's PII. But my street address on it's own isn't PII, it's public record. My point is even with GPDR type protections in place your behaviors will still be sold. GPDR seems to be attempting to address the risk of compromised identity via a hack and just says companies have to solicit your consent and then protect your data. It doesn't seem to specifically cover data selling.

In most cases PII isn't needed to identify a person. You could just as easily be identified by your pant size, movies you like, etc.

That was my point a couple posts back. I’m not using the DoD definition of PII. I’m saying user data, so device ID, IMEI, ad tracker ID - why does this need to be individualized to a device/user? The answer: it doesn’t.

Suppose >90% of dentists in America had a tiny sensor on the end of their dentist tools, and this sensor could automatically figure out what you ate/ drank routinely and target ads to you for grocery stores and restaurants near you based on your eating habits. And, almost all dentists used this sensor bc the ad companies compensated them highly - and no matter which dentist you visited in your town, it would be part of their standard “patient consent” form, so you really have no option but to consent or skip dental treatment. But oh no, if we ended this theoretical practice, what about the poor grocery stores and restaurants? How would they know precisely what you habitually eat and drink? Woe is them! Well, I say screw ‘em. They can present ads to me without precise, sensor-enabled foreknowledge of what I eat/drink, or they can not advertise to me and let me make up my own damn mind what I want to eat and drink.

Now, this cannot actually happen because of HIPAA. HIPAA is the only thing stopping it. But it’s happening right now, every day, with ofher unwanted data collection through smart devices. Because, there is no law to stop it. There is no law requiring an opt-in, or an opt-out. You either accept the “consent form” or throw out your device/ phone/ TV/ fridge/ thermostat/ doorbell/ etc. If there was a new law, the “consent” would become invalid. I bought a new TV last year and it literally cannot function as a TV unless I agree to the consent terms in full - it won’t let you progress past the startup screen. It’s bullshit and I think most tech companies are secretly shocked at what the US govt has allowed them to get away with to date. We need a HIPAA for user-specific data collection and monetization.

 

[Spekkio]

Suppose >90% of dentists in America had a tiny sensor on the end of their dentist tools, and this sensor could automatically figure out what you ate/ drank routinely and target ads to you for grocery stores and restaurants near you based on your eating habits. And, almost all dentists used this sensor bc the ad companies compensated them highly - and no matter which dentist you visited in your town, it would be part of their standard “patient consent” form, so you really have no option but to consent or skip dental treatment. But oh no, if we ended this theoretical practice, what about the poor grocery stores and restaurants? How would they know precisely what you habitually eat and drink? Woe is them! Well, I say screw ‘em. They can present ads to me without precise, sensor-enabled foreknowledge of what I eat/drink, or they can not advertise to me and let me make up my own damn mind what I want to eat and drink.

If that gets me free dental services then where do I sign up?

 

[Jim123]

If that gets me free dental services then where do I sign up?

Would it get people to stop lying about how often they floss?

 

[Hair Warrior]

If that gets me free dental services then where do I sign up?

Same price. The dentist keeps the extra. Cost of sensor, an all that.

My point is that the companies that traffic in data didn’t exist 20 years ago and we’d all be fine if the law changed to their detriment.

 

[Spekkio]

Same price. The dentist keeps the extra. Cost of sensor, an all that.

My point is that the companies that traffic in data didn’t exist 20 years ago and we’d all be fine if the law changed to their detriment.

Your point / analogy misses the entire difference between two different economic models for making money.

People want free software and internet services. If companies charge for software and services, people will pirate them on a mass scale. This is possible because the items don't physically exist; they're just lines of code that can be copied infinitely. Thus software companies found a way to make money that cuts out payments from consumers. If you think there's a demand for ad free pay-for-service software, then the beauty of America is you (or anyone) can try to start up a search engine, online storage, social media platform, and email client that charges a monthly subscription free with the promise that you won't share meta data with anyone and your service is completely ad-free. Let me know how that works out for you.

Meanwhile it's not possible to pirate or steal medical services.

These companies are not charging money to the end user AND charging for ads; they're doing only the latter. If you could replace thousand dollar medical bills, health insurance costs, and medicare taxes with some advertisements I think a lot of people would take that offer.

 

[Hair Warrior]

If you think there's a demand for ad free pay-for-service software, then the beauty of America is you (or anyone) can try to start up a search engine, online storage, social media platform, and email client that charges a monthly subscription free with the promise that you won't share meta data with anyone and your service is completely ad-free.

This exists, but more could be done.

Let me know how that works out for you.

You’re kinda making my point for me. It’s impossible to break into the market because the big tech companies are de facto monopolies. They are already under scrutiny for anticompetitive practices: there’s an article out recently about ad auction rigging between Facebook-WhatsApp-Instagram and Google-Youtube. When the government realized that seatbelts save lives, they didn’t wait around for the free market to introduce a new brand of car that had seat belts at no added cost, and hope that consumers made rational choices in a timely manner.

These companies are not charging money to the end user AND charging for ads; they're doing only the latter. If you could replace thousand dollar medical bills, health insurance costs, and medicare taxes with some advertisements I think a lot of people would take that offer.

Sure. Which is why it’s been made illegal to divulge health information without explicit, written consent. There’s a market demand for a lot of things. Child labor. Driving way over the speed limit. Full auto firearms. Nuclear reactors. Pouring toxic chemicals into rivers. Constructing new buildings that don’t have handicap accessibility. Selling booze to high schoolers. Renting out apartments that don’t have smoke alarms. There’s profit to be had in all of those. That doesn’t mean the government can’t impose limits for a larger public good. I am suggesting that there is a larger public good in strengthening privacy laws in the area of personal user data. Maybe I’m ahead of my time in worrying about something before it’s achieved consensus to the extent that child labor laws have achieved consensus. But I don’t want to wake up one day in a future America with a Huawei/Tencent-printed QR code sticker on my front door like the Uighurs living in Xinjiang do every day.

 

[Spekkio]

You’re kinda making my point for me. It’s impossible to break into the market because the big tech companies are de facto monopolies.

I mean, it won't happen overnight but it's possible.

But more to the point - you don't think these multi-billion dollar companies have marketing and consumer research departments? You think they haven't analyzed for the demand for subscription, ad-free services?

Sure. Which is why it’s been made illegal to divulge health information without explicit, written consent. There’s a market demand for a lot of things...

You're making comparisons between apples and oranges. The fact that I bought a USB cable off of Amazon yesterday using Chrome as my browser, and google uses that metadata to put a USB cable ad on AW.com is not in the same league as child labor. But you didn't know that I did that until I just told you because Google doesn't give away the information (and even if they did, it's of no consequence to me). Give it a break and take off the tinfoil hat.

 

[Jim123]

When the government realized that seatbelts save lives, they didn’t wait around for the free market to introduce a new brand of car that had seat belts at no added cost, and hope that consumers made rational choices in a timely manner.

Volvos had modern shoulder belts when the Big Four were still farting around with padded dashboards and consumers were worried about getting "trapped in a crash." That's consumers and corporations for you. Thirty years later the government mandated those weird motorized front seat belts (that were actually worse than the by-then plain old three point belts) if the carmaker didn't want to put an airbag in the car. That's our government for you. About ten years after that the word got out that the carmakers engineered "supplemental" airbags to work in the worst case, when a fat person wasn't wearing their seatbelt, but this would occasionally kill a small person who was wearing their seatbelt but had to sit close to the steering wheel to reach it. That's consumers, our government, and corporations catering to the lowest common denominator.

 

[Hair Warrior]

Trump administration declassifies unconfirmed intel on Chinese bounties

The disclosure comes months after reports of Russian bounties and after Trump vowed to ratchet up pressure on China.

www.axios.com

A running app can show you the location of secret military bases

Some of the world's most secret and sensitive bases in the world are lit up brightly on the running tracker's map

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Pags]

Trump administration declassifies unconfirmed intel on Chinese bounties

The disclosure comes months after reports of Russian bounties and after Trump vowed to ratchet up pressure on China.

www.axios.com

A running app can show you the location of secret military bases

Some of the world's most secret and sensitive bases in the world are lit up brightly on the running tracker's map

www.independent.co.uk

I guarantee other nation states knew where those bases were regardless of fitbit data.

 

[ABMD]

I guarantee other nation states knew where those bases were regardless of fitbit data.

I remember reading this article a few years ago. If the base was supposed to be secret why the heck were guys using GPS fitness trackers and uploading to Strava? SMH?

 

[Jim123]

I remember reading this article a few years ago. If the base was supposed to be secret why the heck were guys using GPS fitness trackers and uploading to Strava? SMH?

I'd make a Chinese version of the "cybersecurity Jeff is not pleased" meme but it would probably just come across as offensive.

 

[Hair Warrior]

I'd make a Chinese version of the "cybersecurity Jeff is not pleased" meme but it would probably just come across as offensive.

Please include a Winnie Xi Pooh meme when you do.

 

[Jim123]

Please include a Winnie Xi Pooh meme when you do.

 

[Jim123]