Such a Thing as too Paranoid About Privacy?

jackoahoy! writes "As we become more connected, we have the right to be paranoid. But the question is: where do we draw the line between sane and insane privacy? CoolTechZone's Gundeep Hora tackles this issue and uses a recent blog entry on Infoworld to illustrate his point. From the article: 'Whether it's OnRebate.com or any other rebate managing company, asking for the industry you work in and your job function aren't the most personal questions they could possibly ask. However, they must carefully define the conditions for collecting such information. Targeted advertising by user opt-in newsletters and e-mail campaigns (unlike spamming) or internal market research to get a grasp on its customer base isn't unethical, in my opinion. And people making a big deal out of two vaguely placed questions is insensible and out of proportion. If you really are that paranoid about privacy, then do what this reader did and put in wrong information under those questions.'"

Comments

Sure, because we can trust advertising companies

[geminidomino]

...to do the right thing.

If that's their reasoning, then let them ask for the demographic info WHEN the user opts in.

Otherwise they have it sitting there, calling thier name like a chocolate cake in the fridge at 3am. Yeah, they'll never give in to the temptation... and that cake is still sitting there, too.

Persistent and Annoying

[aukset]

I got an iPod for christmas. I installed the software, which required my name and email address, and was forced to opt out for spam. Then I had to update the iPod software. I was forced to enter my name and email address and opt-out for spam. Then I had to update the iTunes software, where I was yet again forced to enter my email address and opt-out for spam. Thats 3 times in 15 minutes that a single company attempted to get my information and permission for spam. At this point, I was so pissed off that I entered a really long, expletive-laced fake email address to download iTunes.

It doesn't matter to me if a company has a reasonable privacy policy when they do everything in their power to get your permission for spam anyway. Like all advertising, it is invasive, persistent, underhanded, and extremely annoying. As far as I'm concerned, it has nothing to do with privacy. It is unreasonable marketing practices that piss me off. I think it pisses a lot of people off, and the backlash from that is a demand for more privacy.

Re:Persistent and Annoying

[jcuervo]

On the odd chance you actually want a reply, set up a hotmail account, use it once, then throw it away.

I just use address extensions (username+whatever@hostname). This not only allows me to track where they're getting my address from, but instantly block further messages to that address. E.g., I have cuervo+slashdot for Slashdot, cuervo+z0karma for AIM, and so forth.

There are some (stupid) sites that don't allow "+" in the address, thinking it's an invalid character, so I just wrote a Postfix map to remap "foo.bar" to "foo+bar" for incoming messages.

If someone sends directly to my email address without an extension who isn't in my whitelist, they get a higher SpamAssassin score.

It's been working pretty well.

Re:Sure, because we can trust advertising companie

[electrosoccertux]

I think the important question that would solve all this is "What is the chocolate cake?" What exactly can they do with this information? Granted I don't want them to have it, but what can they do with it that really would hurt me? Our country is pretty far away from Hong Kong (on the Orwellian map), where you get 10 years prison for spitting gum out on the sidewalk. I don't see collecting information to be a chocolate cake. Maybe one my mom baked, but certainly nothing appetizing at all. It might look nice on the outside, having all those names and numbers and addresses, but it would take a lot of digestion energy to do something useful with it.

Re:If the information is so trivial...

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

I will never shop at a store that has those cards.

Too bad for you, you could save some money and help your grocer better serve you while giving up no personal data at all. I use several of those cards, and "save" quite a bit over what you are likely paying, and not a single one has any real information about me in the profile connected to them. All they know is somebody in my area purchases certain products. This type of information is of value to whatever store I shop at, and they do in fact compensate me with lower prices for using their card. I give up no personal data at all, and they get to learn what kinds of things their customers buy. It's a win-win situation.