First, all the privacy laws and contracts with the Amazon's, FB's, banks, vendors, etc are not agreements to protect your privacy but explicit agreements to have your data bought and sold and used by whomever for whatever they feel like using it. These agreements and laws do not protect the privacy of information about you but authorize its collection.
Second, privacy laws, to the extent which they work, as in privacy of health records, employment, Human Resources, educational records, etc, prevent exposure of bias and fraud and unequal treatment meted out. They fully prevent the public from have public input into public policy issues. When information is not readily available to all, anyone can make the stuff up and challenging false narratives impossible.
Third, the ability of Cambridge Analytics, advertisers, "news" sources and FB apps to target individuals SUCCESSFULLY based on mining information about you indicates that you are easily persuaded by the targeted propaganda that they push. This is your fault. Biases and misinformation we carry about each other and the world must be subject to correction, and that is each individual's responsibility -- a responsibility, most, it seems, ignore -- to not remain ignorant.
1816 January 6. (to Charles Yancey) "If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be."[7] Thomas Jefferson
The school event on March 27th is a great opportunity for Apple to hit home the point that if you care about your children's privacy, you need to insist your school not use Google products. Most Apple users understand the tremendous privacy benefit of using the Apple ecosystem, but most Android/Google users have no idea what a threat Google poses to them. When I ask them, 99% of them are unaware that Google is develop a dossier system on every citizen of the world that uses their products in which they assign what they call a "universal identifier" number to tie all the data together on individuals from their many tentacles. They also have never read their terms of service to know that anytime you use most any Google product, e.g., Photos, you give Google a permanent, world wide license to those photos. They have no idea that every gmail sent or emails received to a gmail account, are scanned and kept forever under your UID. Ditto for every document you upload. Every use of Google maps, everything you've ever said to Google Assistant, every search on Google, most every web surf (for example, there are three Google trackers I am currently blocking on this web site even though I don't use Google products), etc.
Since most of the media is tied into the ad model that Google uses, the media is silent on what is going on. And thus you have people like Leo Laporte on TWIT TV who tell people to give up any sense of privacy as it is all in our benefit to get ads that are more tailored to us. As though that is where this will all stop, when Google and it's other companies or successor companies can use it for anything they want, not to mention criminal hackers, intel agencies, fascist governments, and law enforcement all have access to your Google dossier. Spread the word-Google is evil.
First, all the privacy laws and contracts with the Amazon's, FB's, banks, vendors, etc are not agreements to protect your privacy but explicit agreements to have your data bought and sold and used by whomever for whatever they feel like using it. These agreements and laws do not protect the privacy of information about you but authorize its collection.
Second, privacy laws, to the extent which they work, as in privacy of health records, employment, Human Resources, educational records, etc, prevent exposure of bias and fraud and unequal treatment meted out. They fully prevent the public from have public input into public policy issues. When information is not readily available to all, anyone can make the stuff up and challenging false narratives impossible.
Third, the ability of Cambridge Analytics, advertisers, "news" sources and FB apps to target individuals SUCCESSFULLY based on mining information about you indicates that you are easily persuaded by the targeted propaganda that they push. This is your fault. Biases and misinformation we carry about each other and the world must be subject to correction, and that is each individual's responsibility -- a responsibility, most, it seems, ignore -- to not remain ignorant.
1816 January 6. (to Charles Yancey) "If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be."[7] Thomas Jefferson
Right... the god damn "personnal responsability" shit, no, I get the fucking clue, I've personally got the same access than CA does and I think that's absurd, I should not have access to that data, and Google data, and the data from 20 different sources I have access to.
The problem with your shtick is that you think you alone are in control of the info that's collected on you. It's not.
You're friends, companies you use, services paid for, places you work for, the government, public cameras, people who took your pictures you don't even know, etc , etc, etc, are all collecting and sharing pieces of your information without you agreing to ANYTHING, often drowning their collecting and sharing ways in a 10 page of TOS.
That would be bad enough on its own, but that coupled with the massive capacities of big data and AI to actually manipulate this data makes and cross reference it all, sometimes in real time, means you're whole tact is off.
Yeah, we've given "some" privacy willingly, but a lot of it has been ripped from us bits by bits every day.
What good is not letting FB, Google or Amazon through the front door if the whole back of your house is blown out!!
Apple is such a sweatshop corporation and then they claim to be so superior. Old buss speeds last years ram and adapters to choke a horse. I've never owned, but have been forced to use, Apple computers and it is the main reason I'll never buy one of their phones. They are selfish and greedy with a 50% wholesale profit margin on every item. I hope this stupid trade war brings them to their knees!
Apple is such a sweatshop corporation and then they claim to be so superior. Old buss speeds last years ram and adapters to choke a horse. I've never owned, but have been forced to use, Apple computers and it is the main reason I'll never buy one of their phones. They are selfish and greedy with a 50% wholesale profit margin on every item. I hope this stupid trade war brings them to their knees!
Apple has about 32 percent wholesale, but it varies somewhat depending on the product. Samsung is about 36 percent on the bracket of products in the same price range as Apple's, and Lenovo's for the same is about 40.
And, it won't. It will have a disproportionate effect on smaller companies, like Nvidia, Dell, and AMD, than it will on Apple.
You're new here. There's nothing you said that violates the posting guidelines. But, still take a minute to review the commenting guidelines, conveniently located at the bottom of every forum page so things don't escalate.
...it has to be good legislation with clearly defined goals.
How about a law that says “government can’t take your data without informing you they’re doing it and going through a legal process whereby they show that they have probable cause to do so”?
It’s amazing to me that everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room; always-listening devices. These are the ultimate seductive and ultimate high risk-to-privacy devices made. It gives me chills to think how willingly people are sticking their heads in potential nooses.
The response is “ha ha don’t like it don’t buy it lol it doesn’t hurt anyone you brought it on yourself,” and so no discussion can ever be had on the topic. Society has been forcibly pushed into an autonomous culture (except for when you go against the grain, then it’s heteronomous and you must be forced to believe what they believe) full of nothing but thought-terminating cliches. “Live and let live” and such. You’ll never be able to address these concerns without forcibly asserting objective truth as the foundation for discussion.
The school event on March 27th is a great opportunity for Apple to hit home the point that if you care about your children's privacy, you need to insist your school not use Google products. Most Apple users understand the tremendous privacy benefit of using the Apple ecosystem, but most Android/Google users have no idea what a threat Google poses to them. When I ask them, 99% of them are unaware that Google is develop a dossier system on every citizen of the world that uses their products in which they assign what they call a "universal identifier" number to tie all the data together on individuals from their many tentacles. They also have never read their terms of service to know that anytime you use most any Google product, e.g., Photos, you give Google a permanent, world wide license to those photos. They have no idea that every gmail sent or emails received to a gmail account, are scanned and kept forever under your UID. Ditto for every document you upload. Every use of Google maps, everything you've ever said to Google Assistant, every search on Google, most every web surf (for example, there are three Google trackers I am currently blocking on this web site even though I don't use Google products), etc.
Since most of the media is tied into the ad model that Google uses, the media is silent on what is going on. And thus you have people like Leo Laporte on TWIT TV who tell people to give up any sense of privacy as it is all in our benefit to get ads that are more tailored to us. As though that is where this will all stop, when Google and it's other companies or successor companies can use it for anything they want, not to mention criminal hackers, intel agencies, fascist governments, and law enforcement all have access to your Google dossier. Spread the word-Google is evil.
Apple is such a sweatshop corporation and then they claim to be so superior. Old buss speeds last years ram and adapters to choke a horse. I've never owned, but have been forced to use, Apple computers and it is the main reason I'll never buy one of their phones. They are selfish and greedy with a 50% wholesale profit margin on every item. I hope this stupid trade war brings them to their knees!
Oh look, a new one-post anti-Apple poster going on the Apple rage-wagon on an Apple news site, Get a clue please!
we didn't make this political, and neither will you. This is about Facebook, Cambridge Analytica's misuse of the data, and Cook's response.
It’s inherently political. Cook supported the CLOUD act, which abolishes the 4th amendment, and then has the gall to say he supports “privacy.”
Well, let me clarify then, since it's apparently not obvious. Whataboutism, and "it's only a scandal because of candidate X" to make you feel better about any combination of X, Y, or Z, will be dealt with harshly. The alternative is a straight lock from the get-go.
If you have not listen to the Apple insider pod cast on this subject, you should.
Everyone wants too blame Facebook since it is easier to blame someone else, but most need to look no further than their own mirror. I never bought in to the Facebook thing and always felt it would be bad. I also valued my privacy over getting free things.
I learned a few things from the pod cast, basically anyone who is pissed off your own information may have been used against you, you have to remember you got something free and you gave facebook the right to use your information the way they like. They never had to ask you if it was okay to allow third parts to use your information, you gave up that right by creating that account.
If you want to protect your information. Then stop using free stuff, and pay for your services.
Paying for something doesn't make the "selling you" issue go away.
Between retailers sharing your purchases, banks/credit card providers sharing your financial history, your cellular provider sharing your use data, the government sharing your driving, ownership, and legal history, pharmacy's sharing your prescription history, schools sharing your education history, and recent sharing issues even within Apple (China and likely Russia too, data sharing with publishers within Apple News and targeted ads within the App Store, and the new Apple supported Cloud Act that eases and simplifies the sharing of personal data with "friendlies") this whole conversation about "privacy" is little more than marketing fluff IMHO.
All those paid services don't "protect your privacy" if the provider sees value in sharing it, economically or politically, more so than in keeping it to themselves. Words are easy. Actions are just a tad more difficult.
Please. The sum total of everything you listed pales in comparison to what Google or Facebook know about you. Also funny how you slip Apple into your list to imply they are somehow on the same level. They aren't.
This is going to come back to bite Google and Facebook in the ass. Hard. It was only a matter of time before something happened that would bring privacy issues and data collection out into the public eye. Apple is going to come out of this smelling like a rose while Google and Facebook will smell like the piles of horseshit they are.
Sum of all of them pales in comparison to Google? Have you ever bothered to look at what Google thinks they know about you? Probably not IMHO but you can anytime it tickles your fancy. Then you don't have to make stuff up, you can base it on actual knowledge.
Instead it looks to me like you prefer the lazy (or is it disingenuous) route to FUD-rush, that an evil Google with evil intent factually knows more about your personal life than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion, or a hundred other data aggregators who mine, partner, and outright pay for access to everything from your sexual and religious bent, to your psychological and medical conditions, to the layout of your home and your neighbors homes, to the demographics of your entire extended family and more? They aren't in it to place an ad based on anonymised baskets of web visitors like Google is. They're in it to sell pure data, your TV and on-line viewing habits, your banking and employment and income, where you go, what you do, what you eat... Just selling your personal data for any purpose the buyer wishes to use it for.
Facebook? I'm not sure what they know or the extent of it, that's one I need to pull my data profile from before claiming anything based on any actual knowledge of it. I would suspect they know far more personal verified information in general than Google considering how they collect it but I could be wrong.
So before posting things that may or may not be true but you want to present as fact, why not do the forum a favor and look and when it's simply your opinion make it more clear? IMHO we all have far more to fear from the Acxiom's and Equifax's of the world than an online ad purveyor. Your minimizing the privacy danger isn't particularly helpful to a common consumers understanding, nor is inferring that Apple has entirely clean hands and if you just faithfully trust them then your world is safe from intrusions on your personal life. There is no privacy safe house anymore, particularly so in a digital world.
Google CEO: "We Know Where You Are. We Know Where You've Been. We Can More Or Less Know What You're Thinking About." - Eric S.
You either work at Google in PR or have totally swallowed the kool-aid and truly think they are 100% altruistic with no hidden profit motives (drug sales anyone?). Google absolutely knows more about you than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion with no doubt. You made an errant assumption about the "evil Google" putting words into people's writing that simply did not exist.
Companies offering things for "free" have to make money somewhere and Google is no different. Personally, I prefer a business relationship where I pay money (something of value) and get something of value in return. Data collection companies line Experion, or Acxiom, or Facebook, or TransUnion, or Google, or Twitter I don't trust nearly as much. They don't serve my interests but the interests of a third party that may be adversarial to my interests.
This FB/CA issue shows just how clearly these companies need to be tightly regulated on what data they collect, how you get access to it, how it gets destroyed if needed, and who gets access.
So before posting things that may or may not be true but you want to present as fact, why not do the forum a favor and look and when it's simply your opinion make it more clear?
As I did, and which you should try doing. Simply saying "Google absolutely knows more about you than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion with no doubt" does not make it true. I assume you forgot to mention your statement was opinion and not fact, and you're certainly welcome to one just as we all are. Do some checking and you might change your opinion.
I do know for a fact that Google does not know exactly who I am, nor do they probably care IMO. They think I listen to music I don't, that I'm much younger than they suppose, and that I have hobbies I don't. Why do I say it doesn't really matter? Because all that DOES matter is that the person at the keyboard with eyes on the screen has some interest in the ads put in front of them and proves Google's effectiveness to an advertiser.
Experian or TransUnion or Acxiom on the other hand has reason to know EXACTLY who I am, and does. They have no confusion about whether it's my son or wife or family friend represented. When they sell my file or yours to a credit provider, potential client, or some pseudo-government agency it's the real detailed you and me, financials, legal issues, health data, family dynamics and all.
If you have not listen to the Apple insider pod cast on this subject, you should.
Everyone wants too blame Facebook since it is easier to blame someone else, but most need to look no further than their own mirror. I never bought in to the Facebook thing and always felt it would be bad. I also valued my privacy over getting free things.
I learned a few things from the pod cast, basically anyone who is pissed off your own information may have been used against you, you have to remember you got something free and you gave facebook the right to use your information the way they like. They never had to ask you if it was okay to allow third parts to use your information, you gave up that right by creating that account.
If you want to protect your information. Then stop using free stuff, and pay for your services.
Paying for something doesn't make the "selling you" issue go away.
Between retailers sharing your purchases, banks/credit card providers sharing your financial history, your cellular provider sharing your use data, the government sharing your driving, ownership, and legal history, pharmacy's sharing your prescription history, schools sharing your education history, and recent sharing issues even within Apple (China and likely Russia too, data sharing with publishers within Apple News and targeted ads within the App Store, and the new Apple supported Cloud Act that eases and simplifies the sharing of personal data with "friendlies") this whole conversation about "privacy" is little more than marketing fluff IMHO.
All those paid services don't "protect your privacy" if the provider sees value in sharing it, economically or politically, more so than in keeping it to themselves. Words are easy. Actions are just a tad more difficult.
Please. The sum total of everything you listed pales in comparison to what Google or Facebook know about you. Also funny how you slip Apple into your list to imply they are somehow on the same level. They aren't.
This is going to come back to bite Google and Facebook in the ass. Hard. It was only a matter of time before something happened that would bring privacy issues and data collection out into the public eye. Apple is going to come out of this smelling like a rose while Google and Facebook will smell like the piles of horseshit they are.
Sum of all of them pales in comparison to Google? Have you ever bothered to look at what Google thinks they know about you? Probably not IMHO but you can anytime it tickles your fancy. Then you don't have to make stuff up, you can base it on actual knowledge.
Instead it looks to me like you prefer the lazy (or is it disingenuous) route to FUD-rush, that an evil Google with evil intent factually knows more about your personal life than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion, or a hundred other data aggregators who mine, partner, and outright pay for access to everything from your sexual and religious bent, to your psychological and medical conditions, to the layout of your home and your neighbors homes, to the demographics of your entire extended family and more? They aren't in it to place an ad based on anonymised baskets of web visitors like Google is. They're in it to sell pure data, your TV and on-line viewing habits, your banking and employment and income, where you go, what you do, what you eat... Just selling your personal data for any purpose the buyer wishes to use it for.
Facebook? I'm not sure what they know or the extent of it, that's one I need to pull my data profile from before claiming anything based on any actual knowledge of it. I would suspect they know far more personal verified information in general than Google considering how they collect it but I could be wrong.
So before posting things that may or may not be true but you want to present as fact, why not do the forum a favor and look and when it's simply your opinion make it more clear? IMHO we all have far more to fear from the Acxiom's and Equifax's of the world than an online ad purveyor. Your minimizing the privacy danger isn't particularly helpful to a common consumers understanding, nor is inferring that Apple has entirely clean hands and if you just faithfully trust them then your world is safe from intrusions on your personal life. There is no privacy safe house anymore, particularly so in a digital world.
Google CEO: "We Know Where You Are. We Know Where You've Been. We Can More Or Less Know What You're Thinking About." - Eric S.
You either work at Google in PR or have totally swallowed the kool-aid and truly think they are 100% altruistic with no hidden profit motives (drug sales anyone?). Google absolutely knows more about you than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion with no doubt. You made an errant assumption about the "evil Google" putting words into people's writing that simply did not exist.
Companies offering things for "free" have to make money somewhere and Google is no different. Personally, I prefer a business relationship where I pay money (something of value) and get something of value in return. Data collection companies line Experion, or Acxiom, or Facebook, or TransUnion, or Google, or Twitter I don't trust nearly as much. They don't serve my interests but the interests of a third party that may be adversarial to my interests.
This FB/CA issue shows just how clearly these companies need to be tightly regulated on what data they collect, how you get access to it, how it gets destroyed if needed, and who gets access.
So before posting things that may or may not be true but you want to present as fact, why not do the forum a favor and look and when it's simply your opinion make it more clear?
I do know for a fact that Google does not know exactly who I am, nor do they probably care IMO. They think I listen to music I don't, that I'm much younger than they suppose, and that I have hobbies I don't. Why do I say it doesn't really matter? Because all that DOES matter is that the person at the keyboard with eyes on the screen has some interest in the ads put in front of them and proves Google's effectiveness to an advertiser.
So you are saying the CEO of Google lies about Google’s ability to connect their data graphs. Personally, you have shown little reason to have me trust your supposed “facts” over multiple statements of Google high ranking officers on the record.
and yes, I understand very well how much data these companies have and keep on their products. You should open your eyes and learn a bit yourself.
Well, let me clarify then, since it's apparently not obvious. Whataboutism, and "it's only a scandal because of candidate X" to make you feel better about any combination of X, Y, or Z, will be dealt with harshly. The alternative is a straight lock from the get-go.
How about that?
I take full responsibility for not understanding your meaning, but I still don’t understand how that would be relevant anyway. And yes, I’d prefer an immediate lock. If you’re going to post political stories, it’s best not to let anyone comment on them.
I do know for a fact that Google does not know exactly who I am, nor do they probably care IMO.
That’s not a fair statement; not everyone can just log into his corporate and erase the data his company has collected on him like you can.
Because all that DOES matter is that the person at the keyboard with eyes on the screen has some interest in the ads put in front of them and proves Google's effectiveness to an advertiser.
I gotta tell you, I think I’m neurologically “broken.” No ad has ever worked on me. I’ve never made an impulse purchase, and I’ve never bought anything because I saw it in an advertisement. I’m baffled by how ads “work” and why anyone would click on them when they know that they’re ads.
If you have not listen to the Apple insider pod cast on this subject, you should.
Everyone wants too blame Facebook since it is easier to blame someone else, but most need to look no further than their own mirror. I never bought in to the Facebook thing and always felt it would be bad. I also valued my privacy over getting free things.
I learned a few things from the pod cast, basically anyone who is pissed off your own information may have been used against you, you have to remember you got something free and you gave facebook the right to use your information the way they like. They never had to ask you if it was okay to allow third parts to use your information, you gave up that right by creating that account.
If you want to protect your information. Then stop using free stuff, and pay for your services.
I agree. I always thought it should change its name to PhishingBook.
Yesterday was one of the heaviest moderated days for breaking the forum rules since we updated them.
So, as a reminder, we didn't make this political, and neither will you. Read the commenting guidelines if you need clarification on it. If you want to know why we have the rules and enforce them, please feel free to shoot me a civil message, and we can talk.
This is about Facebook, Cambridge Analytica's misuse of the data, and Cook's response.
Facebook misused the data and Facebook's many users willingly supplied data to that untrustworthy service. The users are as much to blame as Facebook is for collecting that data. Even so, targeted ads and targeted information on Facebook isn't mind control. People still have the ability to check with other sources of information.
On the other hand, in the case of the Experian hack, our government is to blame for requiring the use of an inherently flawed Social Security system and for requiring the use of the SS system, which made the hack of the credit bureau much more damaging in a real world sense.
If you have not listen to the Apple insider pod cast on this subject, you should.
Everyone wants too blame Facebook since it is easier to blame someone else, but most need to look no further than their own mirror. I never bought in to the Facebook thing and always felt it would be bad. I also valued my privacy over getting free things.
I learned a few things from the pod cast, basically anyone who is pissed off your own information may have been used against you, you have to remember you got something free and you gave facebook the right to use your information the way they like. They never had to ask you if it was okay to allow third parts to use your information, you gave up that right by creating that account.
If you want to protect your information. Then stop using free stuff, and pay for your services.
Paying for something doesn't make the "selling you" issue go away.
Between retailers sharing your purchases, banks/credit card providers sharing your financial history, your cellular provider sharing your use data, the government sharing your driving, ownership, and legal history, pharmacy's sharing your prescription history, schools sharing your education history, and recent sharing issues even within Apple (China and likely Russia too, data sharing with publishers within Apple News and targeted ads within the App Store, and the new Apple supported Cloud Act that eases and simplifies the sharing of personal data with "friendlies") this whole conversation about "privacy" is little more than marketing fluff IMHO.
All those paid services don't "protect your privacy" if the provider sees value in sharing it, economically or politically, more so than in keeping it to themselves. Words are easy. Actions are just a tad more difficult.
Please. The sum total of everything you listed pales in comparison to what Google or Facebook know about you. Also funny how you slip Apple into your list to imply they are somehow on the same level. They aren't.
This is going to come back to bite Google and Facebook in the ass. Hard. It was only a matter of time before something happened that would bring privacy issues and data collection out into the public eye. Apple is going to come out of this smelling like a rose while Google and Facebook will smell like the piles of horseshit they are.
Sum of all of them pales in comparison to Google? Have you ever bothered to look at what Google thinks they know about you? Probably not IMHO but you can anytime it tickles your fancy. Then you don't have to make stuff up, you can base it on actual knowledge.
Instead it looks to me like you prefer the lazy (or is it disingenuous) route to FUD-rush, that an evil Google with evil intent factually knows more about your personal life than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion, or a hundred other data aggregators who mine, partner, and outright pay for access to everything from your sexual and religious bent, to your psychological and medical conditions, to the layout of your home and your neighbors homes, to the demographics of your entire extended family and more? They aren't in it to place an ad based on anonymised baskets of web visitors like Google is. They're in it to sell pure data, your TV and on-line viewing habits, your banking and employment and income, where you go, what you do, what you eat... Just selling your personal data for any purpose the buyer wishes to use it for.
Facebook? I'm not sure what they know or the extent of it, that's one I need to pull my data profile from before claiming anything based on any actual knowledge of it. I would suspect they know far more personal verified information in general than Google considering how they collect it but I could be wrong.
So before posting things that may or may not be true but you want to present as fact, why not do the forum a favor and look and when it's simply your opinion make it more clear? IMHO we all have far more to fear from the Acxiom's and Equifax's of the world than an online ad purveyor. Your minimizing the privacy danger isn't particularly helpful to a common consumers understanding, nor is inferring that Apple has entirely clean hands and if you just faithfully trust them then your world is safe from intrusions on your personal life. There is no privacy safe house anymore, particularly so in a digital world.
Google CEO: "We Know Where You Are. We Know Where You've Been. We Can More Or Less Know What You're Thinking About." - Eric S.
You either work at Google in PR or have totally swallowed the kool-aid and truly think they are 100% altruistic with no hidden profit motives (drug sales anyone?). Google absolutely knows more about you than Experion, or Acxiom, or TransUnion with no doubt. You made an errant assumption about the "evil Google" putting words into people's writing that simply did not exist.
Companies offering things for "free" have to make money somewhere and Google is no different. Personally, I prefer a business relationship where I pay money (something of value) and get something of value in return. Data collection companies line Experion, or Acxiom, or Facebook, or TransUnion, or Google, or Twitter I don't trust nearly as much. They don't serve my interests but the interests of a third party that may be adversarial to my interests.
This FB/CA issue shows just how clearly these companies need to be tightly regulated on what data they collect, how you get access to it, how it gets destroyed if needed, and who gets access.
So before posting things that may or may not be true but you want to present as fact, why not do the forum a favor and look and when it's simply your opinion make it more clear?
I do know for a fact that Google does not know exactly who I am, nor do they probably care IMO. They think I listen to music I don't, that I'm much younger than they suppose, and that I have hobbies I don't. Why do I say it doesn't really matter? Because all that DOES matter is that the person at the keyboard with eyes on the screen has some interest in the ads put in front of them and proves Google's effectiveness to an advertiser.
So you are saying the CEO of Google lies about Google’s ability to connect their data graphs. Personally, you have shown little reason to have me trust your supposed “facts” over multiple statements of Google high ranking officers on the record.
and yes, I understand very well how much data these companies have and keep on their products. You should open your eyes and learn a bit yourself.
Again, don’t confuse opinion with facts.
Lied? I think Mr Schmidt was being a bit grandiose, loose with the generalities in a venue where it served a marketing/PR purpose to do so. You can check what Google thinks it knows about you personally and confirm for yourself how accurate it is. Log into your Google account. Don't have one? Then you (the mishmash of the folks with fingers on the keyboard) are simply a marketing datapoint in a basket of others, a faceless consumer who shows interest in certain types of products or who may be convinced to have one. How can they be sure that the person looking at a pair of shoes online is Steven N. and not someone who knows StevenN and using StevenN's computer, tablet or smartphone?
Heck, it's a regular occurrence for someone other than myself to do a search or research a product on some device that's logged in my personal Google account. That person in now me as far as remarketing a product ad and that's what matters.
we didn't make this political, and neither will you. This is about Facebook, Cambridge Analytica's misuse of the data, and Cook's response.
It’s inherently political. Cook supported the CLOUD act, which abolishes the 4th amendment, and then has the gall to say he supports “privacy.”
Well, let me clarify then, since it's apparently not obvious. Whataboutism, and "it's only a scandal because of candidate X" to make you feel better about any combination of X, Y, or Z, will be dealt with harshly. The alternative is a straight lock from the get-go.
How about that?
This isn't a political comment, but isn't the employment of the "whataboutism" accusation basically a wholesale rejection of critical thinking (aka: the use of the Socratic method) to challenge prevailing assumptions?
we didn't make this political, and neither will you. This is about Facebook, Cambridge Analytica's misuse of the data, and Cook's response.
It’s inherently political. Cook supported the CLOUD act, which abolishes the 4th amendment, and then has the gall to say he supports “privacy.”
Well, let me clarify then, since it's apparently not obvious. Whataboutism, and "it's only a scandal because of candidate X" to make you feel better about any combination of X, Y, or Z, will be dealt with harshly. The alternative is a straight lock from the get-go.
How about that?
Isn't leveling charges of "whataboutism" basically a wholesale rejection of critical thinking (aka: the use of the Socratic method) to challenge prevailing assumptions?
No. It's a well known argumentative fallacy. Please don't compare your "But what about █████?!" to Socrates.
we didn't make this political, and neither will you. This is about Facebook, Cambridge Analytica's misuse of the data, and Cook's response.
It’s inherently political. Cook supported the CLOUD act, which abolishes the 4th amendment, and then has the gall to say he supports “privacy.”
Well, let me clarify then, since it's apparently not obvious. Whataboutism, and "it's only a scandal because of candidate X" to make you feel better about any combination of X, Y, or Z, will be dealt with harshly. The alternative is a straight lock from the get-go.
How about that?
This isn't a political comment, but isn't the employment of the "whataboutism" accusation basically a wholesale rejection of critical thinking (aka: the use of the Socratic method) to challenge prevailing assumptions?
If you have not listen to the Apple insider pod cast on this subject, you should.
Everyone wants too blame Facebook since it is easier to blame someone else, but most need to look no further than their own mirror. I never bought in to the Facebook thing and always felt it would be bad. I also valued my privacy over getting free things.
I learned a few things from the pod cast, basically anyone who is pissed off your own information may have been used against you, you have to remember you got something free and you gave facebook the right to use your information the way they like. They never had to ask you if it was okay to allow third parts to use your information, you gave up that right by creating that account.
If you want to protect your information. Then stop using free stuff, and pay for your services.
I get what you’re saying, but two points. How Facebook has been bahaving re privacy the last few years I believe is immoral. And most users have no idea what Facebook is up to and doing with their data and Facebook has no intention of educating people on this. That’s inexcusable. I absolutely blame Zuckerberg and Facebook for this. Also, Facebook has become an engagement at all costs company and it’s horrible. They are choosing to run their operation like this. Zuckerberg is too wealthy to care. They have teams and doctors and scientists manipulating how people behave. The reality is very different from the story they like to tell. It’s easy for AI guys on the podcast to see things a certain way, but the average user isn’t educated enough to know what’s going on. Facebook should operate ethically and respect people.
All I have to say is stop making excuses for people, most people are smart enough to figure out what is going on, they just choose not to. They also choose not to educate themselves.
It's like those people back in 2008 who said they no idea they could lose their house of they did not make their mortgage payment.
I maybe different and figured out early on what FB (which I never used) and Google were up to. But there has been plenty of information out there. You just need to ask one question, how does company make money. Most people do not ask and they want the nanny state to take care of them and look out for them.
If you have not listen to the Apple insider pod cast on this subject, you should.
Everyone wants too blame Facebook since it is easier to blame someone else, but most need to look no further than their own mirror. I never bought in to the Facebook thing and always felt it would be bad. I also valued my privacy over getting free things.
I learned a few things from the pod cast, basically anyone who is pissed off your own information may have been used against you, you have to remember you got something free and you gave facebook the right to use your information the way they like. They never had to ask you if it was okay to allow third parts to use your information, you gave up that right by creating that account.
If you want to protect your information. Then stop using free stuff, and pay for your services.
I get what you’re saying, but two points. How Facebook has been bahaving re privacy the last few years I believe is immoral. And most users have no idea what Facebook is up to and doing with their data and Facebook has no intention of educating people on this. That’s inexcusable. I absolutely blame Zuckerberg and Facebook for this. Also, Facebook has become an engagement at all costs company and it’s horrible. They are choosing to run their operation like this. Zuckerberg is too wealthy to care. They have teams and doctors and scientists manipulating how people behave. The reality is very different from the story they like to tell. It’s easy for AI guys on the podcast to see things a certain way, but the average user isn’t educated enough to know what’s going on. Facebook should operate ethically and respect people.
All I have to say is stop making excuses for people, most people are smart enough to figure out what is going on, they just choose not to. They also choose not to educate themselves.
It's like those people back in 2008 who said they no idea they could lose their house of they did not make their mortgage payment.
I maybe different and figured out early on what FB (which I never used) and Google were up to. But there has been plenty of information out there. You just need to ask one question, how does company make money. Most people do not ask and they want the nanny state to take care of them and look out for them.
Agreed. At some point we have to resist following the lazy, stupid, and knee jerk reaction path and quit feeling like we need society in general, or bureaucrats in particular, to protect people from themselves. Everyone who’s signed up for Facebook knew there never was an expectation of privacy. Everyone over the age of ten knows that businesses must make money to survive. If Facebook subscribers aren’t paying to use the service and if it’s not dripping with intrusive advertisements and if Zuckerberg is one of the richest humans on the planet - where do they suppose all that money comes from? It’s a business. Subscribers are the product.
i have zero sympathy for adults who feel like they’ve been duped by Facebook. Check your clothes closet. Is there a pair of big boy or big girl pants in there that you need to put on? But I am very concerned about minors/children being influenced by social media without an adult being in the loop. I’m not suggesting a prohibition against children being involved in social media. I am suggesting that parents, guardians, and other adults who should have a positive influence over children learning how to navigate the intricacies of the real world take an active role in moderating the many conflicting narratives in social media space. Do you really want Mark Zuckerberg and his business partners like Cambridge Analytica exerting influence over your children’s rapidly developing views of the world behind your back? Maybe you do, but I don’t.
Comments
First, all the privacy laws and contracts with the Amazon's, FB's, banks, vendors, etc are not agreements to protect your privacy but explicit agreements to have your data bought and sold and used by whomever for whatever they feel like using it. These agreements and laws do not protect the privacy of information about you but authorize its collection.
Second, privacy laws, to the extent which they work, as in privacy of health records, employment, Human Resources, educational records, etc, prevent exposure of bias and fraud and unequal treatment meted out. They fully prevent the public from have public input into public policy issues. When information is not readily available to all, anyone can make the stuff up and challenging false narratives impossible.
Third, the ability of Cambridge Analytics, advertisers, "news" sources and FB apps to target individuals SUCCESSFULLY based on mining information about you indicates that you are easily persuaded by the targeted propaganda that they push. This is your fault. Biases and misinformation we carry about each other and the world must be subject to correction, and that is each individual's responsibility -- a responsibility, most, it seems, ignore -- to not remain ignorant.
1816 January 6. (to Charles Yancey) "If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be."[7] Thomas Jefferson
Since most of the media is tied into the ad model that Google uses, the media is silent on what is going on. And thus you have people like Leo Laporte on TWIT TV who tell people to give up any sense of privacy as it is all in our benefit to get ads that are more tailored to us. As though that is where this will all stop, when Google and it's other companies or successor companies can use it for anything they want, not to mention criminal hackers, intel agencies, fascist governments, and law enforcement all have access to your Google dossier. Spread the word-Google is evil.
And, it won't. It will have a disproportionate effect on smaller companies, like Nvidia, Dell, and AMD, than it will on Apple.
How about a law that says “government can’t take your data without informing you they’re doing it and going through a legal process whereby they show that they have probable cause to do so”?
The response is “ha ha don’t like it don’t buy it lol it doesn’t hurt anyone you brought it on yourself,” and so no discussion can ever be had on the topic. Society has been forcibly pushed into an autonomous culture (except for when you go against the grain, then it’s heteronomous and you must be forced to believe what they believe) full of nothing but thought-terminating cliches. “Live and let live” and such. You’ll never be able to address these concerns without forcibly asserting objective truth as the foundation for discussion.
Oh look, a new one-post anti-Apple poster going on the Apple rage-wagon on an Apple news site, Get a clue please!
How about that?
I do know for a fact that Google does not know exactly who I am, nor do they probably care IMO. They think I listen to music I don't, that I'm much younger than they suppose, and that I have hobbies I don't. Why do I say it doesn't really matter? Because all that DOES matter is that the person at the keyboard with eyes on the screen has some interest in the ads put in front of them and proves Google's effectiveness to an advertiser.
Experian or TransUnion or Acxiom on the other hand has reason to know EXACTLY who I am, and does. They have no confusion about whether it's my son or wife or family friend represented. When they sell my file or yours to a credit provider, potential client, or some pseudo-government agency it's the real detailed you and me, financials, legal issues, health data, family dynamics and all.
and yes, I understand very well how much data these companies have and keep on their products. You should open your eyes and learn a bit yourself.
Again, don’t confuse opinion with facts.
That’s not a fair statement; not everyone can just log into his corporate and erase the data his company has collected on him like you can.
I gotta tell you, I think I’m neurologically “broken.” No ad has ever worked on me. I’ve never made an impulse purchase, and I’ve never bought anything because I saw it in an advertisement. I’m baffled by how ads “work” and why anyone would click on them when they know that they’re ads.
On the other hand, in the case of the Experian hack, our government is to blame for requiring the use of an inherently flawed Social Security system and for requiring the use of the SS system, which made the hack of the credit bureau much more damaging in a real world sense.
Heck, it's a regular occurrence for someone other than myself to do a search or research a product on some device that's logged in my personal Google account. That person in now me as far as remarketing a product ad and that's what matters.
It's like those people back in 2008 who said they no idea they could lose their house of they did not make their mortgage payment.
I maybe different and figured out early on what FB (which I never used) and Google were up to. But there has been plenty of information out there. You just need to ask one question, how does company make money. Most people do not ask and they want the nanny state to take care of them and look out for them.
i have zero sympathy for adults who feel like they’ve been duped by Facebook. Check your clothes closet. Is there a pair of big boy or big girl pants in there that you need to put on? But I am very concerned about minors/children being influenced by social media without an adult being in the loop. I’m not suggesting a prohibition against children being involved in social media. I am suggesting that parents, guardians, and other adults who should have a positive influence over children learning how to navigate the intricacies of the real world take an active role in moderating the many conflicting narratives in social media space. Do you really want Mark Zuckerberg and his business partners like Cambridge Analytica exerting influence over your children’s rapidly developing views of the world behind your back? Maybe you do, but I don’t.