Slashdot Mirror
Senator Al Franken Takes On Oculus Over VR Data Mining (engadget.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Oculus says in its privacy policy it will track information about your location, physical movements, and how you're using the Oculus Rift headset. Senator Al Franken, a consumer advocate who has made a point of pushing back against invasive privacy policies like Uber's, wrote a letter to Oculus CEO Brendan Iribe, pushing for more information about how, exactly, Oculus is using all of the data it collects. "I believe Americans have a fundamental right to privacy," Franken wrote. "And that right includes an individual's access to information about what data are being collected about them, how the data are being treated, and with whom the data are being shared." Oculus has not yet commented on the letter. As a result from Franken's letter, Oculus may offer a more detailed privacy policy, like what HTC has done for its Vive headset. Though, it's worth mentioning Oculus isn't collecting much more information than most technology companies. The biggest concern stems around what kind of information Facebook is collecting when the headset is not being used -- there's no off button, so it's always sitting in a semi-ready state.
That's a great idea with just one flaw: I doubt it will work without power.
The real answer is for companies to stop collecting data. There is no legitimate reason that Facebook should have data collection in the Oculus Rift just as there is no legitimate reason that Microsoft or Google should have data collection in their respective OSes.
Mr Franken's question will need to be repeated every month. And that still doesn't necessarily stop the bad behaviour.
The point of the policy is it's a disclaimer of "You give us permission to take anything we see fit". That means the data gathered and uses of and distribution of change with time.
I think Mr Zuckerberg is intentionally trying to trigger new laws that set defined limits.
It's probably best that he returns to being a comedian. He's been in favor of virtually all of the worst intellectual property bills that have gone through the senate.
> Or you could just...not buy one?
Sure, and we're all on board with that. The problem is that each and every piece of new technology is going to be saddled with this unless we solve it legislatively.
Wouldn't it be swell if you couldn't buy a normal monitor anymore? If all monitors were "smart" requiring Internet connectivity, call home to their respective manufacturer periodically uploading samples of displayed image to "improve" quality of product, assist with "troubleshooting" and proactive "diagnostics". Information so critical to continuously supporting and improving the product.
For your safety your smart monitor wouldn't install without an Internet connection, monitor vendor reserves the right to change terms or discontinue your use of monitor "service" at any time. If we change terms you will be given 30 days advanced notice to agree with new terms or lose all access to your monitor service.
Examples of changes we may make include requiring you to pay a small one time or monthly fee, offering direct advertising to your monitor at no cost to you and mirroring your display to our partners. You agree to provide us with a non revocable royalty free license to use any content associated with our monitor service.
I have to admit, I somewhat do agree with GP. If you are developing a program it is useful to know how many of your users are using a certain feature, in order to know whether you still want to support it, or whether you want to support something else. But generally, there should be a simple check box which you tick, and the software should stop with that statistics collection.