Your Data Footprint Is Affecting Your Life In Ways You Can't Even Imagine (fastcoexist.com)

An anonymous reader cites the following excerpts from a FastCoExist article: Innocently clicking on a link results in ad targeting that's hard to shake and our purchases quickly reveal more information than we intend, such as the infamous example of Target knowing a woman is pregnant before she's told her family -- and before she's purchased any baby products. [...] Predictions about you are deeply shaping your life in ways of which you are probably blissfully unaware. Predictions about you (and millions of other strangers) are starting to deeply shape your life. Your career, your love life, major decisions about your health and well-being, and even if you end up in jail, are now being governed in no small part by the digital bread crumbs you've left behind -- many of which you don't even know you've dropped in the first place.

Comments

Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Only buy routine items online. For anything that requires a bit of discretion, buy it at a physical store with cash.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

a physical store with cash

What are you trying to hide, citizen? You have been flagged for closer surveillance.

(Already not having a "social media profile" is seen as a bit deviant and can easily hurt your career prospects, and use of encrypted communications is considered suspicious. It's not going to be long at this rate).

Re:Possible solution

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Only buy routine items online. For anything that requires a bit of discretion, buy it at a physical store with cash.

I wouldn't be surprised if the FBI and NSA start requiring retailers to log cash purchases on their systems.

Re:Possible solution

[fustakrakich]

Time, Newsweek, the Lifesavers, and the second time bomb from the right.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

I would think this may come to pass if the amount reaches a certain threshold.

Re:Possible solution

[NatasRevol]

Bank transfers that are $10k or greater are logged.

Several transactions close to that are flagged as suspicious.

Re:Possible solution

[rickb928]

Were you asked for your email address or phone number when paying cash recently? Ever?

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

All bank transactions are logged. Transactions over $10K are scrutinized. But don't be fooled into thinking many small transactions will get you by the filters. There are people out there smarter than thou.

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't be surprised if they tie your face together with the cash purchase. So unless you go into the store dressed as the uni-bomber, your going to be made in one way or another.

Re: Possible solution

[slazzy]

Or do it the other way around buy lots of bizare and unrelated items, you can always sell them later at eBay. Let Amazon wonder how you can be a pregnant gay man parapalegic who buys a lot of shoes and bike pedals.

Re: Possible solution

[slazzy]

Almost everyday. You've never been asked if you "want an e-mailed copy of your receipt".

Re:Possible solution

[Coren22]

and use of encrypted communications is considered suspicious [alternet.org].

Man...that must be hell for all those people using online banking, email, or any other SSL/TLS encrypted communications stream.

Re:Possible solution

[Applehu Akbar]

"Were you asked for your email address or phone number when paying cash recently?"

Some retailer is going to buy the dead husk of Radio Shack just so they can do that.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Were you asked for your email address or phone number when paying cash recently? Ever?

Would you believe me if I told you that it happens ALL the time down here? Good luck buying a TV, cash, in Brazil without the salesperson asking you if they can make a "cadastro" [Google it] for your convenience. As of now, It is only a bad habit of low-end retailers affecting the lower classes, but as this is already a custom, the government could implement that easily.

And there's the camera stuff that someone mentioned.

Re:Possible solution

[__aaclcg7560]

Already not having a "social media profile" is seen as a bit deviant and can easily hurt your career prospects [...]

I have yet to see that happen in the IT field. The electronic trail under my legal name ended in the 1990's. The only thing I have in terms of social media is a LinkedIn profile.

Re:Possible solution

[__aaclcg7560]

Some retailer is going to buy the dead husk of Radio Shack just so they can do that.

That was last year's news.

Besides the trademark, the hedge fund also acquired the retailer's customer data, which was reported to include more than 65 million customer names and addresses, along with 13 million email addresses. Phone numbers and other information may be part of the deal.

http://www.fierceretail.com/story/standard-general-acquires-radioshacks-intellectual-property-customer-data-s/2015-05-13

Re:Possible solution

[Coren22]

When I was younger, I was taught that you don't use your real name online, it is basic security. Not sure why that would be a negative in any job, but I can't say I was ever asked for my Facebook or whatever social media account in any job interview.

I did have a C level at a small company I worked for friend me on Facebook, but that was because we were friendly towards each other, not to get all the juice about me. I don't actually use Facebook, I just have an account because it is expected in many circles.

Re:Possible solution

[Ken McE]

I wouldn't be surprised if the FBI and NSA start requiring retailers to log cash purchases on their systems.

If it's an electronic register then it is capable of tracking inventory in real time, and keeping records on each sale and how it was funded. If it is a chain store then it probably connects to the mothership either continuously or at the end of each day. It won't however know *who* payed cash that day until facial recognition gets a little better. All the stores are loaded with cameras already, but the software isn't ready yet.

Re:Possible solution

[hey!]

They can tell a lot about you by routine purchases, especially if they look for patterns of change. I've read about the Target case; it isn't just obvious things like buying prenatal vitamins and maternity clothes; a sudden switch in preference for unscented products is common with the hormonal changes pregnant women experience.

The prediction doesn't have to be perfect to be uncannily accurate.

Re:Possible solution

[Mattcelt]

Facebook, Apple, and Google beg to differ. All three have facial recognition that can identify you reliably than most random human beings could. And that's to say nothing of governments.

Do you know where all the cameras in the stores are these days? Did you catch the pinhole cameras at the registers? Or above the doorways in the motion sensors? And what about Meraki or other retail systems tracking your wifi, cellular, NFC, and bluetooth emitters and correlating that with facial data?

There is no more privacy. And I don't even know where to begin to fight back.

Re: Possible solution

[reboot246]

I already do that to some extent. I have a Prime account and routinely buy stuff for a lot of my friends and family. Amazon just pushes whatever is related to my last purchase, whether relevant to my likes or not.

It's funny watching their "suggestions based on my purchases or browsing history" toys, purses, dresses, jewelry, cookware, crayons, athletic gear, adult diapers, etc., to me, a 63 year old widower who didn't buy any of that kind of stuff for me. I've even seen ads on my phone for Barbie dolls, simply because I bought one for somebody else.

I searched for myself last year online and found out I was a black college student in my twenties. Really?

Re:Possible solution

[JoeMerchant]

That $10K limit was set a very long time ago, when $10K might have bought a house in the burbs. It keeps getting more intrusive as time goes on, but technology keeps making it easier to do the transaction checking and logging.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you trying to hide, citizen? You have been flagged for closer surveillance.

(Already not having a "social media profile" is seen as a bit deviant and can easily hurt your career prospects, and use of encrypted communications is considered suspicious [alternet.org]. It's not going to be long at this rate).

I don't give a shit. Come try to get me.

Re:Possible solution

[AHuxley]

Re Only buy routine items online.
Or be seen buying into libertarian philosophies, survivalist literature, self-sufficiency, reading lists about the book of Revelation, big government, constitutional rights and civil liberties, contractors and mass surveillance.
Give the digital bait for something to track, then change up the online buying habits :)

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory: https://www.xkcd.com/576/

Re:Possible solution

[AHuxley]

Yes the new idea is to watch for structuring transactions via suspicious activity reports. ie any regularly made deposits of any amount can induce tracking to find patterns of deposits.
The same would be done by govs for for reading lists, buying of products and services.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost every transaction is like that anymore, and the level of disdain when I tell them "no" has been increasing too.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you trying to hide, citizen? You have been flagged for closer surveillance.

I'm not trying to hide anything, I AM hiding a lot. Now go away or I'll hack your servers and leak some more of the shit you're trying to hide.

BTW, 7 proxies.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Were you asked for your email address or phone number when paying cash recently? Ever?

Actually, yes, I once was asked for a phone number and address at one of those office depot stores when paying for some pens and paper with cash. At the time, though, it was mostly about marketing. I still was mad as hell and protested. Loudly. The sales droid did back down immediately. No apology though. Fuckers!

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

The prediction doesn't have to be accurate at all due to selection bias. It doesn't make the evening news if Target sends maternity coupons to people who are not pregnant. But if there is a human interest story about an outraged father who didn't know his teenager was knocked up, that's news hour gold. So even if their model is only right 5% of the time, 100% of the people you hear talking about being creeped out are from that 5%.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Often. But they proceed normally when I say no thanks. Once a new hire was a little confused about what to press but they figured it out as I was doing the 5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5....tell me when to stop....

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, I got a lot of flabbergasted potential car buyers when I stated that I would only accept a certified bank check as payment (vehicle value/sale price was ~$30k). Both to ensure I actually got my money, but also to ensure I didn't have to make a $30k cash deposit which would get me scrutiny both of the normal kind and through my job's background checks.

By flabbergasted, I mean easy to spot the people who probably had illicit funds, as they refused to buy even though making an offer on the spot (clearly before reading the part in the ad that specified my acceptable payment method, or assuming an offer of cash on the spot would make it all go away).

I suppose some of them just didn't want to spend an 30 minutes to go to a bank to convert the funds, but I remain suspicious of a couple. People with legit income don't have $30k just sitting around in their house.

That said, the $10k limit is definitely getting too restrictive.

Re:Possible solution

[hey!]

That is true. But Target actually hired a mathematician to design the program and measure its impact. They have the data to show it works quite well.

Re:Possible solution

[HalAtWork]

Well obviously they log it anyway for marketing and inventory/accounting purposes

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

And your Slashdot profile...

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

There's really only one way, and it's the illegal one no one ever wants to think about, or that they try to brush off in various ways.

The only way we're getting our privacy back is by making examples of every single individual trying to exterminate it. Only when there is a terrible price to be paid for assaulting the very core of people's lives can anyone think twice about doing so once more.

Because without consequences, why would they give up this power? When have they ever? When has it ever ended any other way?

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Often. Name, email, phone number, even address. In fact I've become quite proficient at making up fake details on the spot :)
Most recently example was when I bought a new dvd player (yep, old school) and they seemed to imagine they'd get my life story to go with the $80 cash. Yeah, because obviously when handing over such vast sums of money I care deeply about followup service and accurate record keeping /sarcasm

Re:Possible solution

[z0idberg]

Are you a member of any loyalty card schemes? You don't need to be asked if you use on of those when paying with cash or otherwise.

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Six, one is a honeypot really.

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately this is not possible and any attempt would be met with harsh retaliation from the government. It's a lose-lose situation for us. Let's get over it.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

I have more than $30k sitting around in my home.... Mainly in things that i could sell.. So if i needed $30k in cash i could just put out some ad's and sell it for cash in a week or two...

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Year 1: Buy survivalist related literature
Year 2: Buy socialism related literature
Year 3: Buy Anarchist literature
Year 4: Buy literature about communism
Year 5: Buy literature about capitalism
Year 6: Profit?

Re:Possible solution

[houghi]

Not saying it is not happening, but in Belgium that would be illegal (unless you have a store card)
When I buy something the store will not be able to link it to me as I do not have a store card. When I do the payment with the card, they are not allowed to store the card details. I have worked for several retailers and they don't.

The CC company gets the payment data, but does not get the items that are bought. So they do not know if I bought condoms or milk.

The CC company has a lot of different types of stores, so they will be able to see and guestimating what was bought. e.g. if you bought something for a few 100EUR at Swissair, you most likely bought tickets. Now here is the fun fact: In Belgium they are NOT allowed to do any analysis on this data (In The Netherlands, they are allowed to do so) so no promotion that goes along the way of "we see you buy stuff a lot online" or "you mainly take out cash'. And yes, they respect that. Otherwise they will loose their license to do business.

And if the police or similar would ask anything like that, they would be laughed away. I have police officers seen escorted out of a building, because they did not have a search warrant with them. Yes, we put the data aside and handed it over with the correct search warrant.

Because here the police can request something like that, but the company has the right to say no. And that in a country where having an ID with you is required by law.

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Possibly a Chinese honeypot, but that doesn't matter when the "trail" leads back to a Starbucks in Siberia.

Re: Possible solution

[Larry_Dillon]

You've struck on a huge part of the problem. The system is good for spotting overall trends buy can be comically inaccurate when it comes to individuals. Like when you buy gifts for your friends that are pregnant, gay, or love shoes.

Re: Possible solution

[__aaclcg7560]

And your Slashdot profile...

Which isn't associated with my legal name.

Re: Possible solution

[Anonymous Cow Ward]

Maybe once, but never when I've paid cash.

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Use of CA based encryption isn't "suspicious" because its ubiquitous and by its nature easy for TLAs to get copies of master keys to forge whatever they want/need.

Re:Possible solution

[gzuckier]

buy stuff for all your friends and neighbors. baby diapers, adult diapers, feminine hygiene products, athletic supporters, ayn rand books, al franken books.

Re:Possible solution

[mjwx]

Only buy routine items online. For anything that requires a bit of discretion, buy it at a physical store with cash.

I wouldn't be surprised if the FBI and NSA start requiring retailers to log cash purchases on their systems.

Fortunately very illegal in my countries (Plural, both the one I came from and the one I'm living in). A merchant is not allowed to tie purchasing data to payment data. One of the secondary purposes of store cards is to tie purchase data to a person (the primary purpose is to keep you going back to that store).

Re: Possible solution

[gzuckier]

All bank transactions are logged. Transactions over $10K are scrutinized. But don't be fooled into thinking many small transactions will get you by the filters. There are people out there smarter than thou.

Scene from cop show (can't remember which) last season: cops open briefcase, it's full of money. Cop A counts it: "Damn, Only $9,990, doesn't violate the law". Cop B pulls out wallet, tosses a $20 into the briefcase: 'Count it again'.

Re: Possible solution

[gzuckier]

Maybe once, but never when I've paid cash.

my home depot does.

Re: Possible solution

[Falos]

Might've been possible 100 years ago. But yeah, today, forget about it.

It's like how you can't uninvent a new tech, something that Our Wealthier Betters have often gnashed and wailed about in futility, when it costs them profits - if their kicking and screaming didn't work, what chance do we have?

Re:Possible solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Source: The bottom fucking line.

Capitalism may be a race to the bottom, but you can be sure it's predictable about it.

These "ads" you speak of, "shaping my life"

[phonewebcam]

They appear where? Oh, wait, *that's* what the ABP icon in my toolbar is saying - its been there so long I'd kinda gotten used to it. I must have become ad-blocker blind, if such a convoluted concept exists.

Re:These "ads" you speak of, "shaping my life"

[Graymalkin]

Advertisements aren't just animated GIFs in the sidebar of web pages. Damn near any site with "personalized" content in any form is prone to machinations of advertisers. Even /. filters content displayed on your main page depending on your settings.

More and more websites are filtering content automatically based on advertiser profiles they have built for every user. Even the searches you perform are tracked and used to tailor results to sites you have visited or searches you've performed in the past.

This becomes an issue in the long run because it's unclear how much information is hidden (by simple omission) from people based on these invisible profiles. There's a very strong potential for the tail to begin wagging the dog: what content websites, search engines, and social networks display can influence user behaviors.

It's not outside the realm of possibility or believability that Starbucks would pay Google or Waze cold hard cash to route directions past drive-thru Starbucks locations for any user with a Starbucks reward card. That route may cost you extra money or time as its purpose is to serve the customer (Starbucks) and not the product (you).

Re:These "ads" you speak of, "shaping my life"

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the gas stations I use (though try to avoid when possible) has tv screens with loud ads at every pump. Very annoying. Below each screen is a small camera; I've often wondered if they use these to monitor who is actually watching the screens (there are separate security cameras). Combined with facial recognition, which is getting better, these could be evil. ABP may soon not be enough when tracking hits the real world in more places, which to me looks like it is slowly happening...

Re:These "ads" you speak of, "shaping my life"

[Sumus Semper Una]

I thought something similar when I skimmed the headline. I mean, I don't bother using an adblocker, but I also ignore and don't click on banner ads. Then I decided to dig deeper and read the NY Times article in the "Target knowing a woman is pregnant" link. That was a very illuminating article and showed me just how clever companies have gotten about analyzing data and creating marketings strategies around the data.

Companies like Target can now do intelligent marketing targeted towards you even if you block all banner ads. Hell, even if you haven't touched a computer in the last 5 years they can still find a way to market to you. Have you ever bought anything from a Target store? If you used a credit card, they have a way to uniquely identify who you are and what your shopping habits are at their stores. What's more, from other sources of publicly available data and purchase histories they can buy from other companies, they can fill in a lot of gaps and figure out much more about you and what you may be interested in buying than you might think.

To those who have never been to a Target store, whenever you buy your items and check out, you're handed a few coupons along with your receipt. These coupons don't exist until your payment is being printed - they come out of a separate printer whose sole purpose is to print coupons tailored to the person who is buying goods. If you've used their store a few times with the same credit card, you start seeing a lot of coupons either for the items you have already bought in the past or for items in the same general category as items you've bought in the past. And that's even if you've never bought anything from them online or used any of their online offers.

I was especially surprised to read that Target had apparently already considered that people don't like companies like Target knowing too much about them. So, if they do figure out, for example, that a woman is pregnant then they pepper in random coupons for unrelated things along with the baby-related coupons to make it seem like the baby-related coupons were just random chance coupons that anyone could have gotten.

It's a very interesting age of data analysis we're entering into. Potentially dystopian and Orwellian? Sure. Potentially utopian and equalitarian? Sure, that too. As usual, I'll predict it ends up somewhere in-between.

Re:These "ads" you speak of, "shaping my life"

[Anonymous Coward]

10/10 topical bantz.

Re:These "ads" you speak of, "shaping my life"

[ultranova]

This becomes an issue in the long run because it's unclear how much information is hidden (by simple omission) from people based on these invisible profiles. There's a very strong potential for the tail to begin wagging the dog: what content websites, search engines, and social networks display can influence user behaviors.

According to the law of force and counterforce, the tail and the dog wag each other. Your behaviour affects what information you see which affects your behaviour, just like now (you watch Fox News because you hold right-wing political beliefs, and you hold right-wing political beliefs because Fox News constantly reinforces them). So do personalized websites really change anything?

It's not outside the realm of possibility or believability that Starbucks would pay Google or Waze cold hard cash to route directions past drive-thru Starbucks locations for any user with a Starbucks reward card. That route may cost you extra money or time as its purpose is to serve the customer (Starbucks) and not the product (you).

And yet, this happens in direct response to you spending lots of time and money in Starbucks, so it's also not outside the realm of possibility that an "intelligent" route planner would plan such a route even if it only considers your preferences. In fact, every route planner has to consider your preferences since there's often multiple possible routes which are optimal in different ways (fastest vs. cheapest).

Block all trackers

[johanw]

I use plugins like Ghostery or similar to block this tracking, and of course an adblocker to block every ad that gets through anyway. On this page alone I block Doubleclick and 2 Google ad widgets.

Re:Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

Recommend disconnect over ghostery

one is open source, other is owned by ad agency

Re:Block all trackers

[mujadaddy]

Does that include...

• janrain.com
• rpxnow.com
• ntv.io
• scorecardresearch.com
• taboola.com

...? I only ask because you only mentioned Google+Doubleclick.

Re:Block all trackers

[h4ck7h3p14n37]

Oh how I wish we only had to worry about websites using cookies to track us. It's becoming pretty difficult to avoid being electronically surveilled in today's society.

• IP address assigned by network provider
• Vehicle license plate
• OnStar equipped vehicle
• Credit/debit card number
• Transit card number
• Cellphone's IMEI number
• Face/biometrics
• store loyalty card number

Re:Block all trackers

[kheldan]

IP address assigned by network providerNot much you can do about that one, it's the way an IP network works.

Vehicle license plateGrass-roots campaign to stop automated tracking?

OnStar equipped vehicleDon't have it in your car. Or physically hack as much of it out of the vehicle as you can. At least find the antennas it's using.

Credit/debit card numberPay cash for as many things as you can.

Transit card numberPay cash for the bus/train?

Cellphone's IMEI numberTurn off your phone when you're not actively using it. At least you minimize the tracking that way.

Face/biometricsGrass-roots campaign to stop automated tracking? Trying to defeat this just draws more attention unfortunately.

store loyalty card numberDon't accept/use them, ever. Whether they show it to you or not, there has to be some sort of agreement that you're implicitly agreeing to by accepting the card, and agreement that allows them to collect more data than the law allows otherwise. Never use them or have them at all.

That's the best advice I can give you, friend.

Re:Block all trackers

[Locke2005]

Toll charges in Washington state are now done by optically recognizing your license plate, then mailing you a bill -- regardless of what state the vehicle is licensed in. (I wonder if they have a reciprocal agreement with Canadian provinces too.) I know because my ex-wife uses a car still registered in my name to visit her friend in Redmond, and by the time the mail got forwarded twice, she had run up $50 in fines for not paying her tolls. And, get this: not receiving the bill is not a valid excuse for not paying it!

Re:Block all trackers

[sims 2]

I still haven't figured out the ebay bucks rewards program what do they get in return that they don't already get by me logging in?

Re:Block all trackers

[kheldan]

Sadly, some of these 'rewards' or 'customer loyalty' programs may be 100% legit with no ulterior motives, but you can't tell which ones are and which ones aren't. Therefore I avoid them completely.

Re:Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

The legit ones are the ones that say "buy 10 burritos and get the 11th free" with space for 10 stamps.

Re: Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

Regarding store cards - a phone number can be used as a proxy for most. Make their tracking useless by sharing that number with a thousand of your close friends.

Re:Block all trackers

[Bing Tsher E]

Unfortunately there are rewards programs at places like Kroeger where you pay an obscene markup for products like meat and poultry if you don't have the card to flash at the checkout. There is a 'regular' price on the package and a 'members' price. The difference is always substantial.

Re: Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

Regarding store cards - a phone number can be used as a proxy for most. Make their tracking useless by sharing that number with a thousand of your close friends.

Actually, I just give them an old land line number from the last apartment I used to live at. Several years ago. In another state. It sure does cut down on the number of telemarketing calls.

Re:Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

My local Kroger seems to grok that people hate this, and the checkers actually will give you a new loyalty card anytime you ask (even every checkout). There's a whole stack of new ones, and a whole trashcan full of once used ones. I've even had checkers not bother to ask but just scan the card and dump it.

You "miss out" on the loyalty things like cheaper gas, but at least you don't get gouged by the "non-member" price. I'm also sure it's all correlated to the debit card I use too, but they have that info already (don't need to the "loyalty" card to track you when you use digital payment). I could pay with cash, but then there's the facial recognition. It's why places like Target, Wal-Mart, etc. don't bother with the loyalty card scam, it's just a waste for the company to do these days.

We're pretty much fucked.

Re:Block all trackers

[kheldan]

Like many people I shop at more than one store in order to get the best (real, not fake) prices on things I need, and none of them require any such 'membership'. You want to ensure my 'loyalty'? Stay out my business, leave my personal information alone, don't price-gouge me, and don't have people working there that do things to piss me off. It's as simple as that, and I think I'm far from being unique in this.

Re:Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

privacy badger?

Re:Block all trackers

[Actually, I do RTFA]

rpxnow.com scorecardresearch.com taboola.com

I don't see those. Of course, I don't see Doubleclick either. But then again, I have NoScript on, so it's likely that slashdot loads the others.

Re:Block all trackers

[Anonymous Coward]

Behavior modification experiments. They already know ID number but not how best to manipulate you. Enough experiment results should help reveal your value judgement lacunas to determine which dark patterns work best on you.

Re:Block all trackers

[KozmoStevnNaut]

I prefer Privacy Badger over Disconnect, Ghostery and others, as the EFF are behind it.

You mean a trial of pebbles?

[o_ferguson]

Breadcrumbs make for lousy trail markers. That's the whole point of that story.

Re:You mean a trial of pebbles?

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

Breadcrumbs make for lousy trail markers so you're putting pebbles on trial? What's wrong with you?

Re:You mean a trial of pebbles?

[Anonymous Coward]

They just really hate smartwatches.

Of course you should end up in jail

[Anonymous Coward]

If you click on pornokids.

Scammers

[DidgetMaster]

And yet....we can't seem to track down and prosecute those scumbags who try to scam old people and other tech novices on the Internet. Most scammers know there is little or no chance of them getting caught or facing some kind of consequences for lying and cheating to get money online.

Re:Scammers

[Anonymous Coward]

No shit...hell, they apparently can't even stop robocalls (Honestly, I think they've stopped trying)

Re:Scammers

[Applehu Akbar]

"And yet....we can't seem to track down and prosecute those scumbags who try to scam old people and other tech novices on the Internet."

In fact, if the feds are unable to track down ransomware scammers, I submit that the whole surveillance problem is a mirage. If surveillance tech had the super-powers everyone imagines they have, that would be both a simple problem, and would be a way of making the public feel better about surveillance.

Re:Scammers

[Anonymous Coward]

How many of those scammers are based in countries, whose governments don't try hard to stop this kind of scamming?

Re:Scammers

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hi... this is windows calling. Your computer have a virus."

Re:Scammers

[Anonymous Coward]

That's only true if there is a vested interest in catching and shutting down the scammers. That may not be the case, depending on where the kickbacks go. Or maybe rogue NSA agents are passing data along to the scammers to help them be more effective (since they don't seem very effective at all, every little bit helps).

Old

[Anonymous Coward]

I've read the first article before, it's actually a great one. But it's from 2012, get a clue.

Re:Old

[aitikin]

I've read the first article before, it's actually a great one. But it's from 2012, get a clue.

That would likely be why the summery (and the story) refer to it as infamous (def: well known for some bad quality or deed.), indicating that most people have heard of/read/or are aware of the story and view the incident in a negative light.

I Have Been Warning People for Years

[Anonymous Coward]

...about this very issue. No one seems to care as long as they get their "free" email, videos, cat photos.

Insurance companies are but one very tiny aspect of why people should care about what trails they leave behind. I remember reading about an executive at one of the larger tracking companies. He said he pays cash for everything he can. He pays for email. He blocks all ads, cookies, etc. Interesting take from a guy who make his coin from tracking and profiling.

This reminds me of this video about ordering a pizza in a future where everyone knows everything about you. It's funny, but it seems to be coming true quicker than most imagine.

Ordering Pizza in the Future

- Block ads using uBlock Origin.
- Use Disconnect, Better Privacy, and Privacy Badger (all at the same time).
- Whitelist cookies.

Surveillance Capitalism

[Elf M. Sternberg]

Adam Smith, the "father of economics" and one of the original theorists of capitalism, believed that capitalism worked because each participant in the marketplace had an approximately equal capacity with respect to other participants to understand the value which he was exchanging with others. Some people are more clever, or have better memories, or are simply more industrious, but on the whole we are all human beings, and our ability to know more than another has an upper bound.

That's not true of machine learning. There is no upper bound. Under surveillance capitalism, there is no limit to what the large companies can know about what you know, can monitor what you do, and can predict what you want. And as long as we remain human, that upper bound on large, corporate control of human beings will only get greater.

Re:Surveillance Capitalism

[swb]

I think most economists realize that information asymmetry leads to market distortions, which is partly why stuff like insider trading is actually illegal and the presence of a number of labeling or disclosure laws that require sellers to provide some kinds of information to buyers. At least here, if you've had to call an exterminator in the past year you have to disclose that to a buyer, for example.

I'm always dismayed, though, at how often lack of transparency is actually allowed through complex billing systems, "introductory" rates and general shady behavior. It's impossible, I know, but I wish there was a way to make sleazy sales tactics illegal where if you can demonstrate a way in which you were intentionally misled in a transaction you could keep the purchase and get refunded.

Re:Surveillance Capitalism

[Anonymous Coward]

Data is transient. People change, things change. After 2 years most of the gathered data is worthless.

And good luck trying to make my profile. Google has tried, and failed miserably. ;)

Re:Surveillance Capitalism

[sims 2]

Suddenlink cable refuses to show their speeds on the mailers they send out.

Both dish and directtv have contract terms that are longer than their with contract rates eg: $50/mo for the first 2 years with 3 year contract then just $399/mo thereafter.

Att's (landline and broadband cable maybe diff can't get theirs here) promotional rates last for the full length of the contract term as do verizon's cellular plans.

The city however is very clear with their plans they list the price and speeds on their flyers and all service is month to month.

Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[DidgetMaster]

If I need to see ads (or I have been too lazy to block them), I guess I would rather see ads for tech related stuff or other things I have searched for; than have to see a bunch of ads for things like feminine hygiene products.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

How about a way to tell the ad companies, no, I already bought that X that I was searching for, and no, I won't tell you where I got it thanks. Or I may not even buy it, my friend was looking for it and linked me and asked my thoughts, so sending related stuff is USELESS.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

You know you've just described an ad/script blocker, right?

Re: Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

Feminine products. Thats all i see from ads. They seem to be targeting my ip address. With 4 women under the roof ( none of which is Mom), all i get is things targeted at them. I use noscript. They dont.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't generally have a problem with ads. The problem I have is, I bought a car 3 months ago, I see nothing but car ads if I turn off my adblocker.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

We already know where you got it. You will soon be purchasing another, from a different retailer, under a different brand (with no apparent connection to the one you have) & sourced from somewhere else, and you'll be paying a higher price.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

You're supposed to race down the on-ramp to try to beat the truck to the gap, then lose and buy another car.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[matbury]

"Relevance" assumes that advertisers have any coherent idea about what your digital exhaust means. We only hear about the rarely specific hits in the media (the example of the pregnant teen is now cited by everyone) and not the millions of misses that nobody remembers or even notices. Just imagine how many false positives and false negatives they come up with,with little or no way of checking if they're right? (Ever been asked if an advertiser's profile of you scraped from the web is correct?) Also, we're very bad a judging how accurate someone's deductions about us are which is how mentalists, con-men, new-age bullshitters, and targeted advertising salesmen get away with so much (It's called the Forer effect).

In short, "targeted advertising" is the 21st century equivalent of alchemy.

Re:Relevant ads better than non-relevant ones

[Anonymous Coward]

That's really not a good attitude. I love seeing ads for things I have zero interest in. It means that my aggressive anti-tracking techniques are working.

Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no replace

[Joe_Dragon]

And then the jail part may be very trun. You have X and the ER does not cover that. Try jail.

Amazon is convinced I need a business account.

[sims 2]

Amazon keeps trying to get me to switch to a amazon business account.

Who knows might be useful but I still don't see how its would be a improvement over prime.

Paypal sends me an offer for paypal credit at least once a month. No I don't want an extra 6 months to pay.

And ebay is now sending me ad's for crap I don't want that's not even related to anything i've looked at what's this new mystery deal thing? Oh lookie it's a roomba what would I do with that?

Re:Amazon is convinced I need a business account.

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

If they want to show up "relevant" ads they need to give us a way to fix their stupid mistakes. Just because I happened to search for something once does not mean I'm interested in buying it.

Re:Amazon is convinced I need a business account.

[Alumoi]

Just wait a couple of years and you'll be forced to buy it.
You break it, you pay it will become you saw it, you buy it.

Re:Amazon is convinced I need a business account.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can edit your history with amazon.

Not just ads

[ahziem]

It's not just ads: financial companies track your transactions, and by default, they share your information with "partners." Scroll through your credit card usage, and you can quickly imagine how your trips to Starbucks can be used to build a valuable profile. To opt out, they make you mail a paper form because they hope you will be too lazy to find a stamp. Of course, Facebook tracks everything.

Re:Not just ads

[rickb928]

"To opt out, they make you mail a paper form"

I don't for a moment believe they actually honor that request.

Re:Not just ads

[ITRambo]

How does Facebook track online banking, or Amazon purchases, since they track "everything"? I don't think "everything" means every thing here.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, they may not have your financial transactions, but they do have a lot. Facebook tracks everything that happens on their and visits to every site with their Facebook "like" buttons. They use machine learning to read your posts, and the mine your social network. Facebook performs randomly-controlled experiments on its users, like an experiment that altered people's emotions. Unlike banks, Facebook's privacy practices are less regulated.

Re:Not just ads

[kheldan]

Of course, Facebook tracks everything

Reminder: You're a dope if you use Facebook, or any other 'social media' platform. It's like smoking: If you're doing it, you can't in any way claim you didn't know it was a bad idea, but you're doing it anyway. These are not survival traits.

Re:Not just ads

[jratcliffe]

Of course, Facebook tracks everything

Reminder: You're a dope if you use Facebook, or any other 'social media' platform. It's like smoking: If you're doing it, you can't in any way claim you didn't know it was a bad idea, but you're doing it anyway. These are not survival traits.

Reminder: the fact that you don't find the costs associated with using a service to be worth the benefits doesn't mean that people who do understand that tradeoff, and find it worthwhile, are "dope[s]."

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

They do honor it, but the opt out is to only stop sending you targeted ads. You can't opt out of their data collection because that's their doing not yours. The only way to opt out of the collection is to always and only pay with cash for everything. But you can't buy everything with cash.

Re:Not just ads

[gurps_npc]

Mostly true, but there is one exception.

Specifically, if you are PAYING Facebook to advertise to other people, then using it may not be stupid. They are not big on letting people/company pay them unless someone from the company already has a Facebook account.

Re:Not just ads

[JoeMerchant]

Or, we're just getting more of a "small town lifestyle" in the big cities now. One major complaint I've heard from small towners is that everybody knows your business... well, with data trails, that is true all over now, not just in Mayberry RFD sized communities.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

"These are not survival traits." While I agree that smoking is bad for your health, I must strongly disagree with that statement. Not too long ago (at least where I live) you simply had to smoke to land a decent job. If you didn't smoke, you were part of the out-group and generally only eligible for the small scrap jobs if that. And there you'd still have had to tolerate chain smoking colleagues working in the same unventilated office. Lung cancer at 60 beats hunger at 25.
With Facebook, we're in this phase. Yes, it's bad for you. But if you haven't got Facebook you simply aren't part of ‘it’ and your chances of having a stab at success in life are greatly diminished. Many people may have Facebook for bad reasons, but not having Facebook is a sure sign you are incapable of rationally weighing your priorities. It shows severe tunnel vision.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

And you think this tone will enlighten people to see it your...'way' ? WTF.

And yes Facebook and LinkedIn are most certainly fricking creepy and kooky.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

Tunnel vision? How so? I choose to remain free of the blights that are social media because I dislike them. I engage people in real life. Not having a social media presence will in no way negatively affect me beyond the odd person thinking I'm anti-social. Employers don't care if people don't have social media unless those people are marketing/social media types themselves. As an IT guy, no one has ever cared I'm not online in any meaningful way.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminder to you: almost NO ONE understands the tradeoff. It is almost impossible to comprehend the tradeoff, even for those of us who understand technology, because we can't yet know how information about us might be used in the future.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean social networking platform.

Re:Not just ads

[AmiMoJo]

How is it even legal for your credit card company to "share" your information with other companies? In the EU it's outlawed by data protection rules. US citizens should demand the same protection!

Re:Not just ads

[Raenex]

Reminder: Prefacing your argument with "Reminder" is a shitty way to make an argument.

The circle is now complete.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminder: You're out of milk and toilet paper...especially do not forget to pick up more toilet paper.

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm lucky. I got my IT position the year before the company HR started cruising Facebook to research resumes. Now they have a standing "policy" (unwritten) that if an interviewee doesn't have a Facebook profile or has one set to private that the company can't look through, that resume goes into file 13 and used to provide extra fuel for the incinerator. From my several feelers that I keep out there... more and more companies are moving in this direction, with several requiring not just Facebook, but also a LinkdIn and Twitter presence as well.

Basically, if you've got an IT position that you're secure in and don't have to worry about being laid off, you're most likely safe without a social media presence. The moment you have to go out on a search for whatever reason however, a lack of presence will hurt you severely. To paraphrase the parent: A well managed lack of privacy beats homelessness.

Re:Not just ads

[RavenLrD20k]

There are a great many of us that do. Unfortunately we have the problem where the advertising and credit card lobby has a stronger and louder "voice".

Re:Not just ads

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly I just always assume the worst. And I still don't really have a problem using my real name on the internet, with the sole exception of slashdot.

I have to delete the occasional youtube or facebook post for posterity, but before you jump on the opportunity to point it out - yes, it is generally never "truly" deleted.

Re:Not just ads

[Druegan]

Good thing I don't use credit cards, don't use banks, pay for everything in cash, order stuff online using proxies, am not in any "rewards programs", block the hell out of advertising, cookies, and scripting online, and just use facebook to post philosophical rants and Bernie Sanders memes. lol

About that Target pregnancy thing

[kaiser423]

I had a talk with a person a while ago about that scenario where I took the Devil's Advocate side of the discussion. Is it really such a horrible thing that Target knows before the family? The lady obviously knows, and it's her secret to tell, so what's the big deal with Target keeping the secret?

I mean, before big data and big stores, the same clerk might have seen you buy the pregnancy test and then the next day see you buy prenatal vitamins. If it was a small town, even if it wasn't the same cashier, their might be enough gossip to connect the two and then they would know before pretty much anyone else. Before that, it might be your bank processing checks, or the credit card company, or whatever. That particular example wasn't super-secret stuff that only a big computer with big data could have figured out.

The point of it was that it's likely always been this way for a number of things, and is that scenario really any different than the many that played out before big data? I get that big data can do a lot more and be scarier, but this particular example just doesn't make me cringe about the power of big data...

Re:About that Target pregnancy thing

[tlhIngan]

I had a talk with a person a while ago about that scenario where I took the Devil's Advocate side of the discussion. Is it really such a horrible thing that Target knows before the family? The lady obviously knows, and it's her secret to tell, so what's the big deal with Target keeping the secret?

  I mean, before big data and big stores, the same clerk might have seen you buy the pregnancy test and then the next day see you buy prenatal vitamins. If it was a small town, even if it wasn't the same cashier, their might be enough gossip to connect the two and then they would know before pretty much anyone else. Before that, it might be your bank processing checks, or the credit card company, or whatever. That particular example wasn't super-secret stuff that only a big computer with big data could have figured out.

Except Target didn't keep it a secret.

You see, Target has done their market research. They found that the birth of child is the ideal time to shape shopping habits - if a husband and wife shopped at Target for a few basic essentials, then went elsewhere for clothes, groceries and other things before a birth, after a birth, they are highly suggestible to change their shopping habits. So Target wants to find those that are pregnant and send them coupons for essentials they may need with the hopes of attracting them to shop more stuff at Target - get more of their shopping dollars with a family who may be pressed for time and unable to do their usual shopping rounds.

The problem was, the daughter was making those kind of purchases, and the father wondered why Target was sending her coupons for pregnancy products. Target's analytics found her profile was basically that of a pregnant woman. So the father confronted Target management asking them why they're sending pregnancy-related coupons to their daughter (who you know, is very virtuous and wouldn't have a child out of wedlock, etc. etc. etc).

Said father later revealed their daughter was a teenage parent a couple of weeks later.

Target didn't tell them, but she fit the profile, and the parents didn't know until Target basically revealed it to them.

Re:About that Target pregnancy thing

[Anonymous Coward]

"The lady obviously knows, and it's her secret to tell, so what's the big deal with Target keeping the secret?"

The thing that bothers a lot of people isn't that target figured something out, it is that target demonstrably isn't "keeping" the secret -- they sent her pregnancy-related things that revealed the secret to her parents before she wanted them to (because fairly predictably, her parents were in the same house, and thus saw things that showed up in the mail for her).

I don't mind starbucks knowing how much coffee I consume. I do very much mind when they sell that information to an insurance company that starts calculating my life insurance or health insurance rates. If someone is stalking me, I really don't want them to be able to buy from starbucks the information about which starbucks I use when (from which you can derive roughly where I work and my schedule).

Lots of people browse for porn; it is fine if the provider keeps that info, but when they start selling to the local newspaper a list of people in your town organized by kink, that gets kind of disturbing. Profitable for the porn company perhaps, but most people find that sort of commercialization of data obnoxious.

Advertisers are demonstrably tracking and sharing a lot of information that I didn't give them. When a social network that I don't have an account on starts recommending me as a "person you might know" to coworkers, that says that they've gathered information about me and my job that I never gave them, which they are now sharing with others. I really don't like that.

You are correct that we've always had gossips around that might notice something about me and share it with others; that doesn't mean we liked them, or that we think that their behavior should be institutionalized in every corner of our lives.

Re:About that Target pregnancy thing

[Anonymous Coward]

...the father wondered why Target was sending her coupons for pregnancy products.

Target still didn't give away the secret. Two years ago my wife and I started receiving baby formula samples, coupons, and so on. We weren't adopting, and we're both within easy view of our 50th birthdays, so childbirth is statistically very unlikely. And no, we didn't piss of anyone, else we would have been receiving coupons for anal warts and whatnot. I have no idea what marketing wire we tripped, but it can happen by error. Mistakes happen - the teenager who received those Target coupons could have kept her secret longer if that were her preference.

That said, her dad seems a bit high strung. Why not just give the coupons to pregnant friends or simply drop them in the fiber recycling bin? I cannot imagine wasting time calling a retailer to complain about baby coupons. Maybe I'd complain about coupons for S&M gear - our mail is sometimes misdelivered to the neighbors and we recently moved to a small town in a fairly red state - but not something so innocuous.

- T

Re:About that Target pregnancy thing

[kaiser423]

All that that tells me is that the father actively didn't want to know the truth and was willing to put up with any level of cognitive dissonance in order to make reality conform to his internal belief system. I guess that the world around him should bend to his will to not accept reality? I mean, honestly -- living under the same roof, financial support, etc. But not close enough to know what's happening in his daughter's life, a daughter not willing to talk to him, and someone else spilling the beans? Still sounds like the same effect of small town gossip to me (having come from a small town).

Re:About that Target pregnancy thing

[Actually, I do RTFA]

If it was a small town, even if it wasn't the same cashier, their might be enough gossip to connect the two and then they would know before pretty much anyone else.

Small towns suck. Especially for non-conformists. Talk to a religious/racial minority from a small town. Talk to a gay person. Talk to a Democrat in a town of Republicans (or vice versa).

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope so! There is no reason I need to subsidize your lazy ass by paying higher taxes while you sit at home playing on Slashdot and eating Doritos until you get diameters.

Where's The Resident Slashdot Spammer?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's The Resident Slashdot Spammer? Did Whiplash succeed in getting rid of "that guy"? It seems unlike that guy to let this story go by without a crap flood.

Re:Where's The Resident Slashdot Spammer?

[Anonymous Coward]

something something HOSTS

APK needs coffee

Pro tip: Don't use your real name on the internet

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't reuse your handle either. Any unique identifier that is not your IP address should be changed between sites.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope so! There is no reason I need to subsidize your lazy ass by paying higher taxes while you sit at home playing on Slashdot and eating Doritos until you get diameters.

Someone obviously doesn't understand ACA correctly.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[fonos]

But you're okay with paying for that person to be housed, fed, and receive medical services in the jail? I'm pretty sure just subsidizing the health care is cheaper than all that...

Way Different

[Anonymous Coward]

The huge difference is the global reach of the corporations and their infinite permanent memory. The old clerk may have seen you purchase a couple of items and may have put two and two together. But, they could never see what you were looking at everywhere you went in town, the next town, on vacation in Italy... They could never remember everything you bought from your babies conception to his college graduation and beyond.

The scale, the permanency, the ease of access, the inability to threaten the clerk should they not mind their own business... It's a whole new ballgame and it sucks.

Clickbait headline

[wonkey_monkey]

Your Data Footprint Is Affecting Your Life In Ways You Can't Even Imagine

Headline contains two "your"s and one "you." Clickbait probability: 98%

Re:Clickbait headline

[almitydave]

Yes, but is it deeply shaping my life? That's not clear.

Re:Clickbait headline

[dinfinity]

It disappoints me that I had to scroll down this far. The headline and the summary are absolutely fucking useless.

Get Your Tinfoil Hat Now

[Anonymous Coward]

Get your tinfoil hat now, because we're all going to need one. Society (even highly technical people like those here at slashdot) shunned us tinfoil hatters for years. You could have had a society where only us willing to sacrifice normality for your sake wore the dreaded hat, but you didn't. We all need one now; get yours soon, the surveillance society is coming to pass.

So not true!

[Anonymous Coward]

If this were really happening I would be getting inundated with ads selling lotion and tissue paper. I have yet to see one.

Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[BitterOak]

Only buy routine items online. For anything that requires a bit of discretion, buy it at a physical store with cash.

Almost all stores have in-store security cameras, and facial recognition software has reached the point where, unless you wear a ski mask when you shop, you can almost certainly be identified. Add to that parking lot cameras that can see your license plates and you might as well give up trying to be anonymous. To make matters worse, as people buy more and more online, brick-and-mortar stores are dropping like flies. Just try to find that book you want to buy at a major bookstore near you. Wait, what major bookstore near you? It's even harder to find all but the most popular CDs, DVDs, BluRays etc., except online. In another generation it will probably be absolutely impossible to buy anything anonymously. Some countries have even gone cashless, so for them, it's already impossible.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[Anonymous Coward]

Book, buy???? The Piratebay and similar sites have never asked for my real identity.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[sims 2]

Please cite as I am unaware that any county has figured out how to go fully cashless.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[BitterOak]

Please cite as I am unaware that any county has figured out how to go fully cashless.

Sweden is almost cashless now, and plans to be fully cashless in the next few years. There are others on the way, too.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.consumerreports.org/privacy/facial-recognition-who-is-tracking-you-in-public1/

Minority Report is here

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[thegarbz]

For many places cash is a convenience item for the few only. Pretty much every government that has imposed transaction fee free debit transactions has made huge strides towards being cash free.

In Australia I never carried more than a $20 note and that usually only got spent when I was eating at restaurants which didn't split bills. In the Netherlands they're a full step further with several places not accepting cash at all any more, and many places offering "pin only" checkouts. Belgium, Finland, Ireland and the Netherlands have also abolished the small denomination coins. Though that was done to make cash easier to handle rather than to promote cashless transactions. None the less if you're a penny pincher paying by debit card will likely safe you some money on that 49.99 euro transaction.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[Anonymous Coward]

At least the president of Sweden is unaware of such plans.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[Anonymous Coward]

In Sweden, cash is still a valid way to pay for your restaurant bills, and other such services. Tourists still use it, as does some elderly folks. / A Swede.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[mjwx]

Please cite as I am unaware that any county has figured out how to go fully cashless.

Sweden is almost cashless now, and plans to be fully cashless in the next few years. There are others on the way, too.

So they'll serve as a warning to the rest. If Sweden truly becomes cashless (which is something I highly doubt) then you'll see another form of currency replace it, probably from one of it's neighbours.

Also Canada is a complete misnomer. They recently switched to polymer banknotes and didn't anticipate the extended life expectancy of the new notes. Australia did the same thing and had to cut back on production in the late 90's after fully switching over to polymer notes.

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[gzuckier]

Please cite as I am unaware that any county has figured out how to go fully cashless.

bitcoinsylvania

Re:Cash is no longer a guarantee of anonymity

[LunaticTippy]

That article doesn't say anything about Sweden being "almost" cashless. They use cash at about 1/4 the US rate. Last time I was in Sweden I used local currency and Euros and nobody batted an eye. Well, I was turned away from a restaurant for being "too sporty" which cracked me up.

What does not kill me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Subjects me to massive amounts of unwanted surveillance and spam. Yay!!!

What is the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see how this news...

What happened to you /.?!?!?!

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[Anonymous Coward]

You are more than welcome to cite evidence supporting the idea that there is massive voter fraud going on and that advanced voter verification techniques are necessary and effective in correcting the problem. Until then, I would just assume not hand over any more tax dollars for programs which provide no benefit.

Stop buying sh*t online

[Anonymous Coward]

Stupid consumers. We own everything you are.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

But you're okay with paying for that person to be housed, fed, and receive medical services in the jail? I'm pretty sure just subsidizing the health care is cheaper than all that...

Please mod this through the roof! This is a form of myopia the rich and powerful can't seem to get past - if you oppress the masses so your station in life is good you then have to contend with a disgruntled population that can't wait to pull you down. But worse, you spend a lot of money keeping them down. It's not even self-serving. It's blatantly stupid and self-destructive.

Big data isn't the problem

[Registered Coward v2]

Rather, it's how it is used

The assumption that correlation implies causation is a common mistake. Real analysis, with a going in assumption the data is incomplete and inaccurate and thus any conclusions must be viewed as suspect is what's needed. Being able to keep competing hypothesis in one's mind and not blindly believing in the data is key to using it properly. Simply accepting the results because it's what the computer said is a pathetic to ruin. It's simply an extension of the cashier who says " Yes, that TV is a dollar because etaht's waht my computer disguised as a cash register says it is and tghus I cannot question it.

An anecdotal example where big data is useful is something I was involved in years ago. Some researchers were collecting data (sound of screeching tires, brake lights coming on, at intersections to predict where traffic engineers needed to focus efforts on making intersections safer before a bad crash occurred. The engineers had to use their knowledge and experience to determine how to make the intersection safer, not just put more cops writing tickets at them. They also looked at "safe" intersections to see if events bore out the analysis.

It's when you take out the human's judgement from the analysis that you run into problems.

Or in Target's case, when you fail to consider the potential ramifications of acting on the data.

It's in the computer, it must be right

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the scary part. People believe the computer--even though most people know from personal experience that computer records have mistakes and errors. It seems most people will believe what a computer says about someone before they will believe that someone.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

There are two ways that public health care concepts "work", and in most countries that have implemented such a system a combination of both of them is used:

1) Government, through taxation, pays for health care
2) The value of doctors and associated professionals is systematically reduced so that much less money into health care goes farther

That's simply how it is. I really despise #2. I'd personally much prefer that I pay for my family's health care and get access to medical professionals who are paid what they are valued, so that my family can get effective expert medical care immediately, when it's necessary. I can understand I'm in the minority on this, but that's not going to do anything change my mind. I'm often in the minority when it comes to things like spelling, being able to calculate a tip, and having emergency phone numbers in my phone. Doesn't make me an asshole, just makes me in the minority, and when the majority are making decisions I'm simply excluded.

The obvious thing here

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the figure out how to game this system and use it to your advantage.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, of course. It doesn't matter to them.
The important thing is that there's those important and rich enough to have doctors and medicine and education, and everyone else - who can't.

Sure, you're getting healthcare, but you're a criminal. You're just being kept alive so your criminal self has to suffer the whole sentence, and your future's been screwed anyways. So it's okay.

Besides, they're not the ones paying for it, when's the last time any of them paid a reasonable amount of tax? It's just poor people being forced to keep criminals alive or become criminals themselves.

Can you think of a more delicious misery culture? Everyone in the primaries has been hard for YEARS just thinking about all this! And that's okay! Because after 4 hours, they can just call on their physician!

Re: Nothing to see here? Move along?

[Anonymous Coward]

Think about what they know about you for once and how much you like that. Here's an example.

Every day, I go through your trash. All of it. And I note everything down. I watch how long you shower. How much hand lotion and kleenex you're using. What your favorite shows are. Who you talked to. For how long. WHO THE FUCK IS THAT WOMAN ANYWAYS, HUH? ... ahem. Also everything you eat. How much you pooped back out. What your fetishes are. What your turn-offs are. Where your daughter goes to school. How much hand lotion and kleenex SHE'S using oh there's pictures (by the way would you like to see that phone?) Also all your credit card information. Where you were driving. How fast you were driving. How many abortions you don't know about your wife (and daughter, by the way would you like to see the pictures on that phone?) have had, in particular those while you were out of town for a few weeks that couldn't possibly have coincided with any kind of sex *you* had with wifey. How SMALL (yes, we've checked what you're actually using) your condoms are. What STD's you've had. And I will never forget any of it.

So who am I?
A lone indivdual doing this? Then I'm the main antagonist of many shitty horror movies ain't I? Gonna go to jail, hello sex offender registry, and hopefully they never let me out, right?

But I have nothing to fear, for instead, I'm SELLING AND GIVING AND EXCHANGING all of this information with *anyone else* who'd ever want to ask, for profit (and also to blackmail you, say, ever were to try to sue me or otherwise take issue with my dealings) or whatever goals or influence I wish for, and therefore, as I am a corporation, and that information won't even die with a physical body like that guy rotting in solitary, what I do is totally okay!

Isn't it? You seem to think it is.

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[skids]

There's less evidence to support significant voter fraud than there is to support significant election fraud and voter suppression.

I hope one of the things Donald Trump does when he's in office is to start implementing the electoral system that America deserves, not this farce

Hah! I'm sure he'd tell you he will, even though it won't be under his purview. In fact, he might even think he's telling the truth (for a change) in that case because he probably does not know the office of the president doesn't have the authority over that.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, they are perfectly ok with that. Why?

Because if you are a private law-abiding citizen and need assistance: You're a dead beat that lays around all day. Instead of working your ass off everyday somewhere, not getting paid enough to pay your living expenses, and not complaining about it.

If you are an individual locked up in jail for some reason: You're a criminal that simply must be kept away from society at any cost. To protect the children of course. Also you should be kept locked away indefinitely because you might relapse into a life of crime if you get out, so best keep you in there and pay for it out the nose. (Even if the whole reason you are there is because you wanted the free assistance you couldn't get outside of prison..... Although now, some areas are picking up on this idea, hating it, and kicking these people out of prison. So you have to commit a real crime just to get support from a society that's not willing to help it's law-abiding citizens in times of need.....)

Basically, people in the US believe that if you are having financial trouble, that it is 100% your fault regardless of evidence, and that you deserve to go without help or assistance to get you back on your feet and be self-sufficient. They would rather watch people starve than help them out. Around where I live, there's a program called "Dare to care" whose commercials basically go like this: " of yours may be in trouble, and cannot afford food. They won't ask you for help because , but they may ask Dare to care. Please give us money so we can buy food for them." That's just messed up.

Sadly, you won't convince people that helping each other out in times of need is a good thing. All they see is their money going to support someone other than themselves, and they want to keep their money so they refuse to help. Never mind the fact that doing so only creates more costly issues later on. (Theft, murder, spread of disease, etc.) That's irrelevant to the idea of someone else getting support in the form of their money. If you can't tell by now, the issue at hand is greed. Given that capitalism rewards greed, and is harmful to society if left to it's own devices unchecked, this is just the natural response to giving aid to others here. Unless the person sees a personal gain in providing that aid, they won't do it because that money is better spent on them, as that gives them better rewards. So to come full circle, give out aid without any percived personal gain? Hell no. Give money to keep criminals locked up and away from you? Hell yeah!

Private Matters

[formfeed]

True. That's one aspect. Privacy is always a balance between self and community. But what do you reveal, to whom, and who has the power to decide...
Your point is made by Janna Malamud Smith, Private Matters: In Defense of the Personal Life

That's the book PJ recommended when she stopped Groklaw, I picked it up because of that, and wasn't disappointed. Very readable, well argued, and a couple good thoughts on private vs. public

Re:Private Matters

[JoeMerchant]

If I ever get time to read again... the thing about "online sharing" is that it is so new that people don't have much experience with how it works. Most small town residents know that if you show up to the local WalMart with skank of the week hanging on your arm, word will spread - but these same folks will post drunk selfies from places that normally aren't very exposed to the public...

Give it 20 years, people will learn. Meanwhile, repuationmenders.com has a booming service business.

And?

[jandersen]

I don't lend much credibility to this - it sounds far too ominous and sensationalist. I mean, how can I take serious a claim that "They" whoever they are, can "Deeply Affect" everybody's life, when I on a daily basis see how ineptly information is beings handled by nearly all players? These people don't seem able to find their own backsides with two hands and a guide dog. Apart from that - I assume we are talking (yet again) about the overhyped "Incredible Powers of Advertising"? People are perfectly able to ignore the crap; I have spam filters that work well, I have adblockers, noscript and others, and I have a recycling bin by my front door for printed adverts, which I discard out of hand, un-opened.

I think this kind of stories are a relic of the sizties or seventies, when advertisers actually believed in their imaginings. The trend now is that they are struggling, not least because companies are losing faith in the value. Hopefully it will go completely away soon.

Re:And?

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume you didn't RTFA. This is mostly not about advertising but about other forms of data mining.

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

"Cheaper" doesn't actually matter to the GOP no matter what they say. People in jail tend to be poor, and poor people are poor because they are of bad character and therefore deserve it. If you make healthcare a right and not an expensive privilege, then people who are of bad moral character who make bad choices in life get to see a doctor, and they don't want to pay for that--but it's OK to pay for jail for them even if jail costs more because they don't want jail and they do want healthcare.

That's literally the logic behind the whole anti-healthcare stance. OK, logic isn't exactly the word for it, but it's a well known documented mental defect present in authoritarian follower brains (most rabid social conservatives are of that type) that they can hold totally contradictory, even mutually exclusive opinions and be utterly unaware of the contradiction.

Indefinite expansion

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't it be clear by now that government intends to expand indefinitely, in terms of both revenue and power over the people? If it's not clear, then how many more years of evidence do we need do reach that conclusion?

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[kilfarsnar]

What about advanced electoral forensics and analysis?

This is the only part of your rant that deserves recognition. Electronic voting machines without a paper trail are not to be trusted. With the shenanigans that have gone on since at least 2000, we need to be double checking the vote tallies and results.

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[__aaclcg7560]

A throwback to the horse-and-buggy era.

That's funny. The U.S. Constitution was written 240 years ago when the horse-and-buggy were still popular.

I hope one of the things Donald Trump does when he's in office is to start implementing the electoral system that America deserves, not this farce.

A new electoral system would have to be approved by two-thirds of Congress and two-thirds of the states. Good luck with that. The Constitution was designed to be difficult to update. The 27th amendment (congressional salaries), the last amendment approved, took over 202 years to get approval.

Bog data.

[Anonymous Coward]

Big Data? More like Bog Data.

Facebook, Google and others have had me interested in Football, Cars, various types of music, all that I have never liked in the slightest.
Sure are great at those predictive algorithms.

The problem with all of these systems is they rely too heavily on averages.
They try to force you in to a group that they THINK have similar interests, but really, that is very far from the truth.
Even more so when it comes to people using a PC over, say, tablets or phones.
People still using PCs are very different from those that have adopted these new systems in many ways that are unpredictable to these sorts of averages.

The same bullshit happens with TV as well, and they like to think they have their predictive stats showing a good representation of genres and personas, but really it is a load of crap.
Introverted people flock to various kinds of shows that extroverts usually don't. They prefer slower, analytical and intelligent shows.
This is why loads of Sciency and Sci-fi shows gets shitcanned regularly despite being popular, simply because introverts don't use the same social media that companies like Nielson scan for "viewership figures".
It isn't all their faults though, TV studios are a large problem too, cancelling a show in the middle of a series even though the latter half of it gets massively more viewers than the former half, IDIOCY, pure idiocy!.

Not that it will matter, the whole advertising industry is due a shake-up because adblocking is growing massively.
They will have to adapt and stop abusing users.
I am fine with plenty of advertisers, including Google and Facebook, but loads of advertisers have abusive ads, video ads on non-video sites, pop-ups STILL IN 2016, page-padding articles filled with ads and so on.
It sucks because innocent advertisers are being targeted by adblocking, and any attempt to reverse the damage led to a massive shitfest because loud entitled kiddy freeloaders that don't even buy premium or ad-free passes when they get offered anyway!

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[Coren22]

There have been districts with >100% voter turn out as recently as last election, but I guess the dead voting is normal to you.

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[gzuckier]

There have been districts with >100% voter turn out as recently as last election, but I guess the dead voting is normal to you.

feel free to post an example, but meanwhile: "Q: Is it true that there were more votes than voters in Wood County, Ohio, and St. Lucie County, Fla., and that Obama lost every state with photo ID laws?
A: No. A viral email that makes those claims is bogus. It fabricates Ohio and Florida results. Also, Obama won four of the 11 states with photo ID laws." http://www.factcheck.org/2013/...

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[Coren22]

I cannot attest for the accuracy as I didn't look into any of the sources:

http://www.redstate.com/aarong...
https://www.commentarymagazine...
http://lwv.org/blog/georgia-ex... (indicates it was people listed in the wrong district/going to the wrong district)
https://www.truthorfiction.com... (some claims true, most false, but the true ones are very interesting)

And this is why I prefer cash over CC or online

[Anonymous Coward]

I really don't want anyone's "help" with this kind of BS. This is why I prefer to "go dark" and live without the stupidity of things like Facebook or Amazon.

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup.. just stick with the ol' hanging chads and pregnant chads. right? Y;know.. the one armed bandit style poleing booths work just fine.. and hey the potential payoff's certainly better than you'll ever get from the election turnout...

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[gzuckier]

We have all this technology to do advanced tracking, consumer prediction, ad-targeting, etc. Advanced. Hyper-advanced.

Yet - watching the primary elections occurring on America - and all elections for that matter - our electoral system is a fucking farce. A complete fucking farce. A throwback to the horse-and-buggy era.

Where is the biometric voter verification? What about advanced electoral forensics and analysis?

Its this way because - because of the massive farce - because the corrupt mostly Democrat-controlled political machines across the country want it that way. They want no voter verification. They want the 20 million illegals who flooded into the country to vote. They don't care about ballot-box stuffing in the precinct centers in the 'hood where the voter turnouts would otherwise be around 10%.

Its time to call BS on America's electoral system.

We have all this advanced technology, and *this* is the voting system we have?!? AYFKM?

I hope one of the things Donald Trump does when he's in office is to start implementing the electoral system that America deserves, not this farce.

even fox news disagrees.
"Several states adopted new laws last year requiring that people show a photo ID when they come to vote even though the kind of election fraud that the laws are intended to stamp out is rare."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/24/voter-id-laws-target-rarely-occurring-voter-fraud.html

"Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.
Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?_r=0

"Claim: List cites instances proving voter fraud in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.
FALSE"
http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/2012fraud.asp

"Summary of eRumor: "This is a forwarded email that cited alleged instances of voter fraud during the 2012 presidential election in an effort to prove voter ID laws are necessary.
The Truth: This eRumor contains a mix of accurate and false data that fails to prove there was widespread voter fraud during the 2012 election."
https://www.truthorfiction.com/2012-voter-fraud/

"Like many of you, our eyebrows raised when we first read this headline out of Georgia: “Fulton election results show more than 100% turnout in 4 precincts.” The culprit causing strange turnout during this primary election? Confusion at the polls over newly redistricted precincts. Because Fulton County failed to revise their voter rolls in time, many voters were erroneously listed in the wrong districts and thus showed up at the wrong place to vote."
http://lwv.org/blog/georgia-exceeds-100-voter-turnout

"A new nationwide analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent."
http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/11/13236464-new-database-of-us-voter-fraud-finds-no-evidence-that-photo-id-laws-are-needed

"Debunking The Conservative Media's 2014 Voter Fraud Horror Stories" http://mediamatters.org/resear...

"7 papers, 4 government inquiries, 2 news investigations and 1 court ruling proving voter fraud is mostly a myth"

Re: Just wait for the GOP to kill ACA with no repl

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope so! There is no reason I need to subsidize your lazy ass by paying higher taxes while you sit at home playing on Slashdot and eating Doritos until you get diameters .

Crap, I'd better get checked right away. I'm probably at high risk as I already have a radius in each arm...

- T

Re:You know what disgusts me???

[Anonymous Coward]

shocker