It's such a fricking shame: I'd marvel at a AI home assistant type thing, ie. what Google Home and Amazon Echo claim to be. But I won't sure them because they won't really work for me but for those companies.

By the way, if you think the artificial lens bit is hyperbole, think again. Quite a few years ago now I was sitting at dinner with some CEO of some startup that had developed a free tool they said helped people with dyslexia read more easily.

So, as I do, I asked him my favourite question: “how will you make money with this?”

He looked at me like I was rather daft before answering, matter of factly, “well, we know what you’re reading.”

Say no more, my friend. Say no more.

#PeopleFarming

Women never had any right to privacy in the first place.
For the record.
Senators criminalized miscarriage.
We can be arrested for it.

White men who treat voting as an intellectual exercise are shortsighted, blinded by their privilege.

I get uncomfortable every time I am at someone's place and then they start talking to some "assistant" I didn't know was listening

so maybe he doesn’t like Elon Jet because anyone with a critical thought could assess: any tesla owned by a journalist he banned from twitter could just shut down on them unexpectedly?

the scarry thing is that one might not be able to even afford a Tesla car, but the same person might be in dire need for an artificial lens, or being blind instead.
We ARE talking extremes here, but only twenty odd years ago, opening other people's mail was illegal in big part of the world, and now it's part of standard procedure in the same places. Tech only makes it easier.

A few years ago @frank_rieger started Microsoft Word, and before he could type a single letter it notified about 30 servers on the Internet. Microsoft claims to be conform to the EU law, but is not willing to specify the data and its usage. (https://www.heise.de/news/Datenschutzergaenzung-Microsoft-setzt-EU-Datengrenze-um-7447136.html)

point taken

Well said, Aral.

people should really "get" this.

Problem is: the companies that make all the money from this are in cahoots with the governments who can, in turn, use the same tech to strengthen/enlarge their control easily.

The same governments that write the curriculums for our kids' schools...

This really needs to come from the bottom. I hope it will have time to sink in, before it's to late.

>Privacy is not something you can “vote with your wallet” on.

Yet you give only examples of things you vote with your wallet on done by commercial companies.

Wouldn't spying done by government agencies be a better example?

where I live, government uses Aws to host citizens info.

I used to watch sitcoms as a kid, then at 18, I stopped. I left home to engage life and become the person I am today. It wasn't that I couldn't afford a TV, I just wanted to focus on what mattered to me and there was no time left in my days of discovery and self improvement. At 23, I started reconnecting with people I knew and tried to watch a sitcom with them, and could not get over the colossal waste of time it was. That's what you're up against. The idiot box is watching them now.

@leaning_left That’s just one use case. If I have enough data about you and the right algorithms, I can create a simulation of you; a proxy for manipulating your behaviour in line with my interests. There are lots of use cases for that.

potential tracking is mandated by law for all car manufacturers here in Germany.
"Automated Calling of emergency services after a crash and supplying location data" is what happens.

But they manufacturers decide what to do with the data the rest of the time 🤷‍♀️
Oh, and a sim-card is also mandated.
And reading the privacy policy then Tesla (at least to me) seem to do the best job.. sadly.

@leaning_left We do indeed.

@aral: Yesterday, there were Company Towns.

They might come back.

my new hearing aids come with an app with an opt-in to get online support. Fine print says that consists of telling you of software updates and collecting "usage data" to "improve products"
Another feature is to save your favorite places so your settings can be stored and applied automatically.

Nope nope nope.

and how should we protect it?

I’ll play if your insecure .. since living in a big fish bowl is ultimately better than living in the puny little fish bowl, of community ponds. Devil or the deep blue sea choice is funny though. Its to late tec to go backis taking over with or without Tesla, better wait for a ChEVe anyway. They don’t make Tesla here, we just educated Elon. How’s that

afuckingmen!!!

This cannot be stressed enough. Privacy is a basic right that doesn't exist unless we protect it.

if Google makes houses I will eat a car

Oooh #PeopleFarming is the best name for it! "Surveillance capitalism" or "data vampirism" are a little hard for the average person to grasp. But "people farming" might might hit home.

To second and go into more depth: it's very hard for companies that do not double-dip to compete with those that do. Companies that violate privacy get extra streams of income that give them extra advantage in the market. Regulation is usually the only way to level the playing field. Same applies to other unethical-but-profitable things like abusive labor practices.

This already happened with cars writ large. "I just won't drive a car" -> "I won't live in an area without good public transit, have a job that requires a car, or go camping"

Even today you can't choose not to be recorded by someone else's tesla, and it's a bit like Gmail: at some point of market saturation it doesn't matter whether you own one or not.

"artificial lens company seeing everything you see"

That's going to be an awful lot of unsolicited dick pics hitting their screens, then. This could be fun.

People already surrender their privacy for convenience - if you carry a mobile phone, they can track where you are at any given moment.

I'm not saying it isn't a concern. My degree is in digital security, and I actually don't own a smart phone or a smart TV or an Alexa or anything like that because I know better, but in my experience, telling other people doesn't stop them shrugging and going on using the things. The ship's sailed.

I agree. And there are areas where "vote with your wallet" is already not working. Example: Many public schools in germany switched to M$/O 365 during the pandemic (cheap/without cost and easy to admin for the shool was the promise to them) and since then the students must use it in school and for homework. Neither the students nor their parents could "vote" against it.

Agreed, and yet few had reservations when companies like Google implemented school “solutions” which begin tracking activity from children as early as kindergarten. Trying to opt out is virtually impossible, and school boards typically do not understand or evaluate beyond face-value because of the perception of “free” services. We are certainly already there, but is the scope of this issue already past the point of creating severe consequences that are beyond reproach?

When not possessing a product (technology, service) means social exclusion (Ivan Illich’s “radical monopoly”?), one is not really free to opt-out.

"Why do you worry if you have nothing to hide"

privacy is central to human dignity. Time for myself. Things and actions just for myself.

The panopticon is a nightmare.

I don't see how this argument relies on any property that's specific to privacy (as opposed to other desirable properties). Do you think privacy is special in that way, or that this applies to most similar properties too?

Random examples of properties that could be substituted for privacy and where I'm not sure whether they satisfy the conclusion: "net neutrality for phones" (ability to call anyone, regardless of their phone operator) or non-monopoly-inducing ticket prices on transit (a company can e.g. offer tickets at a price sublinear in distance, so that people will be disincentivized from combining different transit companies in one trip).

Spot on! A dangerous development…

Have there been any significant progress on a "Digital Bill of Rights" ?

I'm just a single dumbass and I'd really like to read what something like this would look like as legislation

Today, I can choose not to buy a Tesla if I don't want to be tracked by the vehicle's manufacturer and subjected to subscription fees for features that are already built into the car.

Tomorrow, I don't have a choice because every manufacturer has implemented the same crap and there's no regulations against it.

exactly right. We can’t control this at an individual level. Don’t buy an iPhone because Mommy Apple is always listening and you WILL get an ad. Start talking about kimonos and see what happens. Google Maps and Waze know every where you have been. It is endemic to our society. As a result we need systemic protections.

privacy is mostly becoming mostly the luxury of the wealthiest between us. The gadget mania re-establishes the balance by offering more surveillance tracking to the rich that can afford expensive gadgets.

There's an easier solution bro. Random Tesla vandalism? Would you risk it? You know. Buy one?

Today women have already lost their right to privacy. Everyone should be alarmed.

I am wondering about the covid vaccine chips?/s

I mean, there are cameras all over Teslas, which I'm not sure how well they're protected but my guess is not enough. So when they slap facial recognition on those cameras or the data they collect, if you even go near one, they'll know. I assume, of course, that they haven't already done this (they're not yet an adtech company)...

the powerful have been demoing depriving communities of food. I am much more worried about food insecurity than the other kind, as we move further into climate change.

How do we do that when our personal data is worth its weight in gold? When our economy is based on the collection and trading of it? We can't go back in time.

i used to wonder if we were past the time when unions were still needed and if government regulation was a good thing.

i have come to realize that regulation, unions, collective bargaining and anti-monopoly laws are the only ways individuals have any chance of coming out ahead in any conflict of interest with large corporations.

we all have to vote for politicians that will protect our rights, privacy, health and ability to organize.

This is why I keep looking into open source software & alternative methods of getting things done, as I find this is so true when it comes to #DisabilityAccessibility tools. One aspect- similar to the vision aide you've mentioned is my tracking of long-term contact lense availability and coverage of polycarbonate lenses in eyeglasses. About 20 years ago there was a huge variety of contact lenses available for vision correction, so that people could get what worked best & for me that was lenses lasting about 1-3 years before changing them, all options in durations were in cataloges & made by a few companies, now though the longer term are almost nonexistent, as the preference is locked in short term wearing & buying more. Polycarbonate lenses- which lasts longer & is lighter in weight (which I need to avoid injury from the heavier option) is now being removed from medical insurance coverages and thusly even as it's cheaper for manufacturers and processors, is sent out as pricier for consumers.

With AIs too, it used to be that at first they were a "nice additional installation" then preinstalled but "the default was off" & now they come preinstalled and even if you turn them "off" I've had them repeatedly turning themselves back on, mainly with "system updates".

The phone in your pocket does a way better job of tracking everywhere you go and reporting it to big tech.

An interesting perspective

@PeterJ If, based on your instance’s domain, you’re based in Australia, then you are, sadly, right. Very few human rights are enshrined in the Australian constitution to my (albeit limited) knowledge.

However, in the EU, privacy is a human right protected under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass/european-convention-on-human-rights

Furthermore, people who have their privacy violated as a matter of course are the victims here. Instead of victim-blaming, we should be addressing the crime.

Tomorrow we may have the gene therapies and pesticides to eradicate everybody via autoimmune disorders except for the Amish.

Are you Roundup Ready?

so don't buy a car, any car, or lens thing...

exactly, you can't vote with your wallet if you are the product

Echoing this, the only privacy rights we have seen taken back from companies like Google/Facebook/etc. has been clawed back through legislation (GDPR) and not from consumer choice. It must be protected at a government level or else it won't exist at the personal level.

@PeterJ But you know very well that enforcing the #ECHR at the level of states and in the context of the digital world is not so easy - we can rarely invoke the convention directly in the courts , usually a violation of specific national laws has to be shown. And only at the end of the road are the European courts, where this convention is read directly.

@miklo @PeterJ

#GDPR
would like to draw attention to the wonderful work of @rufposten

With Tracktor.it! you can generate standardised letters and complaints in minutes. This way, you can enforce your rights as a visitor against a website or an app company en masse.
https://tracktor.it

I would argue it is a bit of both. We have to make it state-mandated, yes. No question.

But you can also vote with your wallet, by supporting open-source projects that respect your privacy, allowing them to hire more devs. A better experience will definitely bump up the user count and hence the people on your side for political change

@miklo Indeed, enforcement is not guaranteed and requires constant vigilance. But there is a world of difference between having it and not having it. It does exist. There is case law. It does affect national legislation and laws like GDPR trace their existence back to its fundamental tenets. Lack of enforcement is an executive failure, not a legislative one. So we can – and should – talk about institutional corruption (lobbying, revolving doors, etc.) but let’s not conflate the two.

@PeterJ

here here! I say we fix it by forming a consumer advocacy group nonprofit dedicated to this. I would have them sue the pants off of companies that abuse data, such as the ones with large data breaches with a feduciary duty to protect said data.

almost entirely degoogled my phone (android lineage but no Gapps) and laptops etc

Now many mainstream car makers will be installing android auto - its really hard to avoid google and almost impossible to totally escape fortunately i am bottom of the vehicular foodchain so i am ok for a while

Privacy should be the default

#degoogle #google #privacy #android #spyware #AndroidAuto #surveillance

if it is smart it is connected, if it is connected it is vulnerable... so it won't just be corporations in your data

100%. It's terrifying, but so SO many people will just use whatevers most convenient and won't even consider using an alternative. Even when a lot of my online friends are very left wing and are scared of whats happening on Twitter, I can't convince most of them to try Mastodon. The only saving grace is things like open source software, home 3D printing setups, and the ability to manage tech yourself or know somebody public spirited enough to do it for you cheaply/for free.

I feel like we are already in a bad place when it comes to IoT. You can’t “vote with your wallet”, all IoT sucks your data away in the most horrible way. You can be a weird nerd that has time to set everything up on OSS to keep things locally, but what % of people can really do that?

So for Mitigating the data collection on my smart car. I rent it out on Turo. Of course this has its own privacy complications. 😐

I fear we’re too far down that particular rabbit hole with the tunnel collapsed behind us. 👀

couldn't agree more. It seems we are blindly going down a path with no regard as to where it takes us.