Comments on: Paying the piper for privacy Where media and technology meet Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:48:25 +0000 hourly 1 By: ptiffany Mon, 18 Mar 2013 18:51:39 +0000 The problem is that a fundamental aspect of the whole concept of privacy is: The Assumption of Privacy. Users shouldn’t have to read through long legalese to determine that the service provider starts with an assumption that essentially nothing is private.

The arrogance of these providers adds to the frustration and outright anger on the part of many users.

Most users aren’t aware of or concerned with the problem?! Speak for yourself. Most people I communicate with are very concerned about their security and privacy and often write and speak about it.

One of the reasons why Microsoft’s Passport was an abysmal failure was that most people don’t trust providers to maintain privacy. Oddly, Microsoft was mystified – stating publicly that they couldn’t understand the public’s demand for privacy.

One of the reasons why there haven’t been numerous public outcrys regarding privacy failures is that there is little practical recourse against the humongous providers who wave small-print legalese as protection against class-action lawsuits.

If this big, predicted event, after numerous privacy and security breaches over the years, occurs, what will happen to the botched service provider(s) after they state, “Oops!”?

By: paintcan Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:44:01 +0000 “It’s become a truism: If you aren’t paying for it, you are the product.”

Only in the Internet world is that true, but that’s because that’s how companies like Facebook and Google exist at all. If they charged users they wouldn’t be Facebook scale or even noticeable at all, and they know it, and also they know their market wouldn’t use them.

If you don’t have a reason to buy the information and can’t justify the subscription as part of your business, or if the service is something you can’t really live without, there isn’t much reason to use most of it.

Television and radio advertising paid for free services in the past and the consumer wasn’t the product. The advertised products and the shows were the product.

Premiums won’t necessarily guard user activity either. They will simply watch fewer subscribers’ activities and try to peddle that data to their advertisers. Newspapers and Magazines were doing that for years. Magazines like the New Yorker sometimes send out user profile questionnaires. They always want to know your yearly income range and your level of education among a lot of other things.

“Paying the piper” will kill off a lot of the pipers.

By: usagadfly Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:17:30 +0000 What needs to happen is that the public needs to stop being so stupid about for-profit corporations and the internet. Such organizations provide nothing for nothing.

The Open Software movement is different. The computer people who expanded and essentially created the “web” are different. The goal there is making the world a better place through doing good. Corporations are in business to make money. If you do not know the difference between the two, you have far too little knowledge of the world to complain. To quote P.T. Barnum, “There is a sucker born every minute!”

By: markhahn Sun, 17 Mar 2013 04:59:24 +0000 privacy has become a popular boogeyman to warn about. unfortunately, the increased attention brings a lot of sloppy thinking.

for instance, has the author read the detailed report on exactly what information Google captured? it’s the stuff you’re already broadcasting in the clear – the stuff you don’t care enough about to encrypt. you might as well just paint this stuff in big letters on the front of your house, taking care to make it visible from the street where a car with a camera just driving by will be sure to see it…

privacy IS an interesting issue, one we need to spend time thinking about. but this kind of article DOES NOT HELP. we need careful, thoughtful, in-depth, researched work on the topic, not journalistic drive-by shootings.