Slashdot Mirror
DuckDuckGo CEO: 'Google and Facebook Are Watching Our Every Move Online. It's Time To Make Them Stop' (cnbc.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report from CNBC, written by Gabriel Weinberg, CEO and founder of DuckDuckGo: You may know that hidden trackers lurk on most websites you visit, soaking up your personal information. What you may not realize, though, is 76 percent of websites now contain hidden Google trackers, and 24 percent have hidden Facebook trackers, according to the Princeton Web Transparency & Accountability Project. The next highest is Twitter with 12 percent. It is likely that Google or Facebook are watching you on many sites you visit, in addition to tracking you when using their products. As a result, these two companies have amassed huge data profiles on each person, which can include your interests, purchases, search, browsing and location history, and much more. They then make your sensitive data profile available for invasive targeted advertising that can follow you around the Internet.
[...]
So how do we move forward from here? Don't be fooled by claims of self-regulation, as any useful long-term reforms of Google and Facebook's data privacy practices fundamentally oppose their core business models: hyper-targeted advertising based on more and more intrusive personal surveillance. Change must come from the outside. Unfortunately, we've seen relatively little from Washington. Congress and federal agencies need to take a fresh look at what can be done to curb these data monopolies. They first need to demand more algorithmic and privacy policy transparency, so people can truly understand the extent of how their personal information is being collected, processed and used by these companies. Only then can informed consent be possible. They also need to legislate that people own their own data, enabling real opt-outs. Finally, they need to restrict how data can be combined including being more aggressive at blocking acquisitions that further consolidate data power, which will pave the way for more competition in digital advertising. Until we see such meaningful changes, consumers should vote with their feet.
[...]
So how do we move forward from here? Don't be fooled by claims of self-regulation, as any useful long-term reforms of Google and Facebook's data privacy practices fundamentally oppose their core business models: hyper-targeted advertising based on more and more intrusive personal surveillance. Change must come from the outside. Unfortunately, we've seen relatively little from Washington. Congress and federal agencies need to take a fresh look at what can be done to curb these data monopolies. They first need to demand more algorithmic and privacy policy transparency, so people can truly understand the extent of how their personal information is being collected, processed and used by these companies. Only then can informed consent be possible. They also need to legislate that people own their own data, enabling real opt-outs. Finally, they need to restrict how data can be combined including being more aggressive at blocking acquisitions that further consolidate data power, which will pave the way for more competition in digital advertising. Until we see such meaningful changes, consumers should vote with their feet.
While I like the sentiment I doubt it will be effective in the end. Google and FB have huge numbers of talented engineers. They will find ways to dig through any attempts you make to hide your data from them. The fact is, the very usefulness of online services seduces most people into freely sharing everything. Only the most paranoid will succeed in hiding and by doing so they will deny themselves a lot of services and useful benefits of the Internet.
Consumers are both lazy and don't give a shit about security or privacy. This statement is validated by the fact that these mega-corps now have successfully amassed huge data stores on billions of humans. The only way change would ever happen is if security and privacy were the default setting in the default program. Anything else requires effort that only 0.01% of society will care to expend, and any change to the default will be fought by mega-corps who rake in hundreds of billions by preying on insecurity and a lack of privacy.
Oh, you stopped carrying a smartphone because you didn't want to be tracked? What the hell difference does that make when 99.99% of society around you is still carrying one? It only makes you stand out apart from the rest now, and even more observable as an anomaly. Being secure now creates insecurity.
Sorry, but the fight for privacy and security is done. The war is over, and privacy and security lost.
Conceptually, the user gets paid in services in exchange of personal data and digital tracking.
We give you pictures of cats and idiotic filters of animal ears on top of your picture, you give us the ability to own your digital behavior history. most people who cared enough to find out what the deal was agreed to it and found it to be a great one.
We give you pictures of cats and idiotic filters of animal ears on top of your picture, you give us the ability to own your digital behavior history. most people who cared enough to find out what the deal was agreed to it and found it to be a great one.
The difference between internet pioneers and the paranoid, and the rest of the world. After we figured out how to monetize the toobz, it was all downhill in that respect.
As for me, my major personal concern is not so much being tracked, it is that the internet is IMO unusable without ad and script blockers. Pages that take forever to load, jump around when they are loading, and go to a new page and do it all over again.
I discover this anew when once a year or so, I have to disable my blockers for one reason or another, then forget to re-enable them. But I discover that error quickly.
I didn't pay for a fast connection just so I can get modem speed loading due to ads and trackers.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
about this kind of tracking. I've got bigger fish to fry. I'm in the US, so I'm not guaranteed access to health care. My jobs keep getting offshored and if they can't do that they try to bring in cheap labor to do them (e.g. H1-Bs or whatever your local equivalent is) and I'm staring down the barrel of a massive Automation push that, even if it doesn't take my job, is going to displace so many workers it's going to royally fsck the economy. Then there's climate change and water shortages coming, the absurd cost of college for my kids and not being able to retire when I can't work anymore. Oh yeah, and my country's involved in 8 wars and working on 9 and 10.
When I read stories like this I think about that XKCD comic about the guy with megabit encryption getting hit with a $2 wrench until he gives up his password. There's just much, much easier ways to oppress me than taking away a bit of my privacy so they can sell me crap.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Targeted ads are better than random ads. At least they show you things you might like.
More like things you already bought.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
If you're waiting for the US Government to do something about this, you'll be waiting almost as long as you will for the tracking companies to do something themselves through some sort of 'voluntary code of practice'.
For anything worth doing, you need a government not owned by the businesses at risk here. The Europeans look to be making quite some inroads into this sort of thing with GDPR and the like. They don't outlaw tracking by any means, but at least raise the cost of doing business a bit. That won't stop the big companies of course, but it's a start.
In the meantime, adblock, noscript, ghostery, privacy badger etc are really your only defence - if they don't get it in the first place, then they can't misuse it. I predict there'll be some actual tracking limiting laws coming out of Europe in about 5 years time - it still won't stop tracking or profiling entirely, but it'll put further dents in those activities as a business model, and give the advertisers a less certain destination for their ads (which in turn will devalue the tracking/profiling activity somewhat).
And I'm entirely OK with that.
They need my ad revenue and tracking more than I need their content. I'm simply not playing the game.
I'm perfectly happy to permanently block a website which can't be used by the time I've blocked all of the crap; I do it all the time. It saves me the trouble next time when my blocker just refuses to go there.
You may be unable to live without this shit, but I sure as hell can. I don't feel entitled to their content, nor am I dependent on it. If your site successfully blocks me because I don't allow cookies and your trackers, well, so be it. If it doesn't, that's not my problem.
Living without some of the crap on the internet is a small price to pay for not handing over my privacy and browsing habits to some asshole marketing company.