Slashdot Mirror


Did We Lose the Privacy War?

eihab writes "I've been a fanatic about my online privacy for the last few years. I've been using NoScript and blocking Google Analytics, disabling third-party cookies, encrypting IM and doing everything in my power to keep data-miners at bay. Recently, I've been feeling like I'm just doing too much and still losing! No matter what I do, I know that there's a weak link somewhere, be it my ISP, Flash cookies, etc. I've recently gotten AT&T U-Verse, who, according to their privacy statement, will be monitoring my TV watching habits for advertisement purposes. I'm extremely annoyed by that, yet I love the service so much and I don't think I can cancel it. I just can't take this anymore. I have nothing to hide, but I do not want to be profiled and become member #5534289 in a database somewhere that records everything I do. I know I'm not that interesting to anyone, but the idea of someone being able to pull up everything about me with a simple SQL SELECT statement and a couple of JOINS makes me cringe. One of the reasons I hate data mining is that data security is not understood and almost non-existent at a lot of places. Case in point: I changed my life insurance two years ago, and the medical firm that conducted my health screening was broken into and computers with non-encrypted hard drives and patients' data were stolen. That medical firm didn't really need my SSN, but then again neither did AT&T when I signed up for U-Verse. Am I just too paranoid? Is privacy dead? Should I just give up and accept the fact that privacy is not the norm anymore (like Facebook's founder recently said) or should I keep fighting the good fight for my privacy?"

14 of 521 comments (clear)

  1. You surrendered. by characterZer0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'm extremely annoyed by that, yet I love the service so much and I don't think I can cancel it.

    You are agreeing to give up your privacy. You are not losing - you surrendered.

    --
    Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    1. Re:You surrendered. by delt0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thanks. Its not like there are not alternative ways to get your media, TV shows, movies or otherwise. The submitter has sold privacy for convenience. Convenience of mere entertainment no less. Privacy is not getting taken away, we are giving it up freely.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    2. Re:You surrendered. by godrik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As an alien living in this US, I find this SSN situation ridiculous. Everybody is going to say that you should not give your SSN to ANYBODY. Yet everybody is asking for it...

      It seems to me that people are schizophrenic about SSN number. Is it a public unique identifier of a tax payer or a secret information ?

    3. Re:You surrendered. by Znork · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its not like there are not alternative ways to get your media, TV shows, movies or otherwise.

      Indeed. Most 'media providers' on the net certainly don't seem to be asking for SSN...

      And in cases where it's hard to avoid some tracking, like social networking sites, just sprinkle freely with sockpuppet identities to screw with the tracking. If you're worried about leakage between browser profiles or users, create virtual machines to run multiple virtual identities. Create your own happy little multiple-personality collective.

      Those with the idea that they want to track 'everything' often seem to miss how much crap 'everything' actually contains. And while they can attempt to record as much as they can, they can neither make you tell the truth, nor the whole truth, nor shut you up once you wander off into fantasyland.

      And hey, best of all, polluting the data really seems to piss the data mining junkies off.

  2. solution: add noise by StripedCow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems that the only solution is to add so much noise that data miners will have a really hard time filtering out the real data.

    Here is a start.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  3. OP, show some backbone by spyrochaete · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've recently gotten AT&T U-Verse, who, according to their privacy statement, will be monitoring my TV watching habits for advertisement purposes. I'm extremely annoyed by that, yet I love the service so much and I don't think I can cancel it.

    If there is a privacy war it is a war of one. You know the chef is poisoning the soup but you find it too delicious to stop eating.

    Cancel your cable. War won.

  4. Re:Inherent privacy is dead. by PhilHibbs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So what we have in lieu of privacy is occasional access to anonymity. You can maintain that anonymity for a little more of your life for a little more effort, but maintaining it 24/7 for everything you do is increasingly difficult.

  5. Re:Inherent privacy is dead. by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That is to say, SSL, TOR, NoFlash, NoScript etc, still don't have a place in our lives as geeks.

    Speak for yourself, not all geeks share your defeatism.

    --
    "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  6. The offensive part. by Xzzy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thing that bugs me about being endlessly monitored and categorized is that it's never used to make my life better. It's only ever done to help some random corporation improve their profits by some fraction of a percentage.

    If being tracked watching a TV show for a full season resulted in them going "hey, thanks for being a loyal viewer, have this X as a token of our appreciation", I wouldn't complain so much. It wouldn't necessarily have to be a material bonus, in this day and age they could simply grant access to some kind of insider info website. The possibilities are only limited by imagination.

    But no. Everything I do gets dumped into a database and sold to the highest bidder. It serves no purpose but to try and get more money out of my wallet. Or if the government is involved, measure my odds of being a terrorist.

  7. Re:Inherent privacy is dead. by malloc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Besides, I think we live in a world where we have obscurity through density, instead of obscurity through privacy. Billions of people on this earth, nearly a billion of them connected to the 'net. Embrace it. Eventually, if enough personal data gets out there, it may become worthless to mine it due to the sheer volume available.

    Panopticlick wants to disagree.

    That, and "billions" / "sheer volume" are meaningless in the face of computers processing billions of cycles a second. The whole point of data mining is software can find neat correlations and connections that a human never could. You are not hidden in the billion bits of data.

    --
    ___________________ I want to be free()!
  8. Computers are the weapon... by mi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For ages our privacy was protected only by the others' ability to remember. A human being can only remember so many faces and facts about other people (and himself, for that matter)...

    Written records reduced the privacy immensely. Computers made the next giant leap. The only thing we can do is legislate, what the computers are allowed to memorize, but those would be merely human (as opposed to physical) laws and have serious limitations. Legal pitfalls will abound — an Evil Corporation may lease a server in a foreign locale to keep your data, for example. WikiLeaks has shown the ways around various attempts to close access to information.

    Information wants to be free. Does not it?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  9. Re:You insensitive clod! by LMacG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Would have been better if you'd actually used his slashdot ID instead of the message number, but you get a few points for at least trying to make the obvious joke.

    Just call me uh, Clem.

    --
    Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
  10. Re:Hobby by Algan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I put virtually no effort into remaining anonymous or hiding my digital footprints, yet oddly enough I've never had the secret police bust down my door, or had any clear reason to believe that my privacy has been violated.

    This just means you're an average Joe that makes no attempt to disturb the status quo, has no real power or influence and has nothing anybody in a position of power wants.

    --
    If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
  11. Re:Hobby by bbernard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "or had any clear reason to believe that my privacy has been violated."

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Your statement seems to be almost the corollary to statements like "If you don't have anything to hide what are you worried about?" I would also suggest that you're not looking at the bigger picture.

    "I also happen to believe that anything I do online, by nature of the internet, is public, and accordingly I choose not to put most of the details of my life onto it."

    What is preventing your friends from doing that for you? If I have an Android phone, and I have your contact info, along with perhaps your birth date, address, email, an ID picture of you, and some other interesting details in your contact, now I've given that data to Google, haven't I? What contract or understanding do you have with Google to govern how that data is being used and protected?

    --
    ----- Connection reset by beer