Slashdot Mirror


'Thousands of Companies Are Spying On You' (cnn.com)

Security guru Bruce Schneier warns that "thousands of companies" are spying on us and manipulating us for profit. An anonymous reader quotes his article on CNN: Harvard Business School professor Shoshana Zuboff calls it "surveillance capitalism." And as creepy as Facebook is turning out to be, the entire industry is far creepier. It has existed in secret far too long, and it's up to lawmakers to force these companies into the public spotlight, where we can all decide if this is how we want society to operate and -- if not -- what to do about it...

Surveillance capitalism drives much of the internet. It's behind most of the "free" services, and many of the paid ones as well. Its goal is psychological manipulation, in the form of personalized advertising to persuade you to buy something or do something, like vote for a candidate. And while the individualized profile-driven manipulation exposed by Cambridge Analytica feels abhorrent, it's really no different from what every company wants in the end... Surveillance capitalism is deeply embedded in our increasingly computerized society, and if the extent of it came to light there would be broad demands for limits and regulation. But because this industry can largely operate in secret, only occasionally exposed after a data breach or investigative report, we remain mostly ignorant of its reach...

Regulation is the only answer.The first step to any regulation is transparency. Who has our data? Is it accurate? What are they doing with it? Who are they selling it to? How are they securing it? Can we delete it...? The market can put pressure on these companies to reduce their spying on us, but it can only do that if we force the industry out of its secret shadows.

The article also insists that "None of this is new," pointing out that companies like Facebook and Google offer their free services in exchange for your data.

But he also notes that there are now already 2,500 to 4,000 data brokers just in the U.S., including Equifax.

170 comments

  1. Spying by tquasar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Every breath you take, Every move you make, Every bond you break, Every step you take, I'll be watching you. Sting

    1. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they make a regulation that forces transparency, they'll just add to their EULA:

      "You agree that by signing this, you are waiving your right to have any transparency from us."

      You don't get it. People will just click "Yes I agree" no matter what.

    2. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is bigger than your bubble.

      Answering with "I don't care." invites us to not care about your self-interested opinion.

    3. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's one: porn is only going to get better every year in the future.

    4. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Puff Daddy was still a good musician when he wrote that song. You got the lyrics wrong though, it's "I'll be missing you".

    5. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Eventually some law will be passed that you will violate, and these companies that you don't bother bothering with are going to catch you and you will wind up likely doing some time in a private prison, for someone else's profit.

      Do you trust your government with the info the snoops scarf up? How about the local DA who needs to boost their conviction ratio so the private prison people don't fill the war chest of the person running against them?

      Of course, there are other governments. You know that extradition treaties let someone in the US be hauled off to Thailand for execution if they make a crack about the Thai royalty?

    6. Re:Spying by BrianMarshall · · Score: 1

      I have never bought anything as a result of seeing an ad on a web page.

      --
      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
    7. Re:Spying by Mistlefoot · · Score: 2

      You have never bought a ticket to an event or movie you saw advertised online?
      Or an event that popped up on your facebook feed because a friend was going?

      You have never craved and eventually bought fast food after seeing an ad?
      Or bought something in a store that was only familiar to you through an ad? You didn't expect to buy that Cider or brand of Beer.....but you saw the ad and had awareness....and hey, why not?

      Many advertisers advertise to brand. Not expecting you will impulse buy.
      You have never seen an ad for a car or TV or new device that looked cool and you eventually bought?
      You never thought a product was "cool" because you liked there ads?

    8. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find that impossible to believe. Maybe you have never consciously bought anything due to an ad you saw on a web page.

    9. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Early April Fools. Everyone already knows they're spying and haven't cared thus far. The over-caring is the April Fools joke part.

    10. Re: Spying by javaman235 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, you bought the things you wanted, but what you wanted was guided by the advertising. Everyone thinks ads don't effect them, but industry pours billions in. Why? Because sales numbers show it does effect them.

      I remember noticing it was 5:00 on the fifth once, and pulling into a local subway, I noticed the song in the back of my head "five, five dollar footling" from the ads, the 5:00 made me think of them and decide I wanted a sub. I insure with Geico because the lizard ads. It's just laziness, when we want something, we query the info in our brains to think of where we can get it, and the ads are there.

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    11. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No to all your questions.

      But I haven't had money for anything other than food+shelter my entire life. In fact, if you count medical care, clothing, etc. as 'shelter', then I have pretty much never even had enough for that. Let alone extra things that I might want. I learned long ago it's best to just not want.

    12. Re:Spying by BrianMarshall · · Score: 1
      Nope.

      I am quite poor. I buy few things beyond my rent and limited diet. And used books. And cell and internet service, of course.

      I recently bought a Green Cheeked Conure to replace an Amazon Parrot that passed away. And I bought a lot of new toys and such.

      Little of what I buy is advertised. Coffee maybe. Reading about coffee will sometime make me want a cup.

      --
      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
    13. Re: Spying by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      The ads mainly affect the people buying the ads, they are scammed. Ads on the internet, sell me stuff, like WTF? I am on the internet, the ads sell me nothing, I have access to the internet, anything I want to buy I look up, check, evaluate options, and then decide whether to meh, buy nothing or buy a particular something, that often decide by the closest purchase opportunity. So advertisings sells me nothing, that is just the way it is.

      Look straight up, the numbers mean it is all bullshit. You know gave thousands of advertisers targeting you with different products, each compete for seconds of you time, during the day you will see thousands of ads but for different products and the total composite of ads dilutes any impact, you can not possible remember one ad amongst the thousands products et al offered. Old day you would see tens of products advertised hundred of times, now its thousand of products advertised once.

      The numbers they produce, yeah, bullshit baffles brains, https://www.urbandictionary.co.... Those advertising companies flash off numbers the advertisers can not check. Look according to Google advertisers had no problem cutting off youtube obviously becomes it did not have that much impact.

      The only ads that really work are banners tied to content, don't get carried away with the banners, you sort of want them to infiltrate the subconscious as the reader focuses on content, all very subtle and you just want your ad as the banner for that article for the full day or even week. Adwords is just a scam targeted at advertisers, as are the first handful of advertiser links in the search results. I noticed Google cheated on those, if you were looking for a company the search would produce them as number 1 in the ad block, you click they pay and below the page in the results, so you could not see it. I noticed the change it used to be 1st in the ad block 1st in the results below but you would ignore the ad block as you trained yourself to do and click the result in the search not in the ad. So they tweaked it to hide that company down the results so you would only see the ad link and not results and click that link so google could charge the company for a search and pretend it was an advertisement and claim 'SUCCESS' of advertisement, 'er' no the advertiser just got scammed. When I noticed it I checked, actively searching for specific companies and again and again, number 1 in the advertisement and below the fold so you could not see it in the search results, page down and there it would be, scammy fuckers.

      Googles et al number one advertising target is advertisers not us and the data mine them and know them and know how to treat them and what they want to see and what will fool them. Google datamines everyone, including the staff of competitors, including advertising company staff, including management of every single corporation they can. They are also likely playing the insider trading game with that datamining but shhhhhhhhh, Alphabet does that not google.

      I defy anyone to believe Google can not inside trade any corporations based upon data mining all it's staff and management, most companies should dump google in favour of https://duckduckgo.com/?q=duck.... Probably the SEC should consider investigating data mining companies to check to see whether they are datamining companies staff in order to profit by insider trading, that datamining makes them an insider, getting information before anyone else does.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    14. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... O.O

      Are you serious? Or trolling?

    15. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ad influenced? No ... ofcourse not. Only gaffot twerps buy for those adman motivations and skunkpuppy ployz. What kind of a zit are you ?

    16. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      WHAT WE SAID: We need common sense gun laws.
      WHAT YOU HEARD: Take away all the guns, melt them, and make a statue of an NFL player kneeling.

    17. Re:Spying by BrianMarshall · · Score: 1
      Being poor, I virtually never eat out. Being a loner (with a parrot so smart it's scary), I don't have a Facebook feed.

      While it is true that I may catch some "brand elements" in my peripheral vision, I am pretty good at just not seeing ads. (If they are animated at all, I have to cover that part of the page so that I can read the content.) But, as I said above, practically nothing I spend money on is advertised.

      --
      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
    18. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to piss on you?

    19. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its branding, not impulse buying. There is no 1 on 1 relation between an ad and you buying.

      The ad serves to let you know company A exists at all and is still a player. You absofuckinglutely are influenced. Way, wayyyyyy deeper than you think. In fact, the people who are denying this are easier to influence... Queue xfiles themes..

    20. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything but what is advertised to me MIGHT, just MIGHT get considered.
      Things that get heavily advertised are NOT bought. I don't want to pay for those Ad Execs to buy expensive stuff. They are a plague on our world (along with Lawyers and especially Lawyers who become politicians).

    21. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you bought the things you wanted, but what you wanted was guided by the advertising. Everyone thinks ads don't effect them, but industry pours billions in. Why? Because sales numbers show it does effect them.

      I remember noticing it was 5:00 on the fifth once, and pulling into a local subway, I noticed the song in the back of my head "five, five dollar footling" from the ads, the 5:00 made me think of them and decide I wanted a sub. I insure with Geico because the lizard ads. It's just laziness, when we want something, we query the info in our brains to think of where we can get it, and the ads are there.

      It is impossible for you to conceive that some people dont have access to computers and the internet?

    22. Re: Spying by BlueStrat · · Score: 1, Insightful

      WHAT WE SAID: We need common sense gun laws.

      WHAT MOST OF YOU MEANT BUT WOULDN'T SAY SO NOT TO ALARM PEOPLE: We need an Australian-style gun ban.

      There are *already* "common sense gun laws" on the books. These laws *should have prevented* most if not all of the recent mass-shootings IF they had been *enforced* properly!

      You don't need *new* gun laws, just for-deity's-sake enforce the ones we already have! What the hell makes anyone think that creating more laws will help when the laws already in place that should have stopped these homicidal lunatics were not enforced? And when these new laws you want are not enforced either, and more people die? What then? More new laws? There's a term for believing that repeating the same actions and behaviors over and over will somehow result in a different outcome. Fix enforcement, don't just jump to infringing a civil right.

      Fact: US Gun-Related Homicide is down over %50 over the last 25 years.

      Fact: US Gun Violence Victimization is down over %75 over the last 25 years.

      These facts according to official US government statistics.

      We have the "if it bleeds it leads" 24-hour-news-cycle pathology amplified by the internet social media echo chambers and being used by politicians and ideologue firebrands to flame fear and anger in order to drive the anti-gun agenda when the facts do not support that gun violence is growing, but in fact dramatically the opposite.

      And there's the US mental health crisis. The majority of the recent mass killers had already been under mental health treatment and/or medication, and not just for minor, temporary conditions, yet still purchased a gun. The homeless shelters all across the US are filled with the mentally ill. That is not being addressed by anybody in power on either side.

      If you want guns and other dangerous things out of the hands of the mentally ill who commit horrible acts, then don't allow the mentally ill the opportunity by kicking them out of the institutions that once kept them and us safe. Fix the institutions.

      We've had guns for a very, very long time and yet we are only having these problems relatively quite recently. The way we handle (or don't, actually) the mentally ill and the fostering of Post-Modern thought which says all moral codes or no moral codes are equally valid and there is no objective right and wrong, foster a culture and society where life has little value and almost nothing is objectively "wrong".

      It's no wonder there are mass murders and chaos in such a broken society with such a sick culture.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    23. Re:Spying by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Let them spy to their heart's content. If they're using me for marketing they're going to be very disappointed.

      I have just taken a look at what Google has on me, following the Guardian article's advice, and it is miles out. Literally thousands of miles out as they think I'm in Australia (but I'm in Europe). According to my Ad profile, they think I'm interested in celebrities and mothercare - WTF ?? I've never serched for those things in my life

      They actually invite you to add more topics, the cheeky bastards. I'm glad Im wasting their time.

    24. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So this is the face of schizophrenia.

    25. Re:Spying by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      You have never bought a ticket to an event or movie you saw advertised online?

      We need to distinguish between functiona ads and psychological ads. Funtional ads are like when I need a plumber I search for plumbers in my area and find their websites and pick one. So that is me responding to an advert, but functionally because I do not know any plumbers otherwise. And BTW, I don't pick the one with the website with most bling. Similarly if I want to buy eg a camera I look at camera makers websites to see what they have on offer, factually, the specifications, combined with studying review websites and forums.

      OTOH I don't react well to psychological adverts - the one pushed in my face, trying to make stuff look cool or trying to put a brand name in my head. They are more likely to deter me.

      You didn't expect to buy that Cider or brand of Beer.....but you saw the ad and had awareness....and hey, why not?

      It does not work like that with me. Over time I try all the beers I see on the shelf and settle with the one I like best. If a new one appears, I'll try it to see if it is better still. Ads have nothing to do with it. Of course when a new beer is launched it is often accompanied by an ad campagn, and I've no doubt the admen think I bought it, and congratulate themselves, becase they think it is because I saw the ads (like you seem to think too) but the ads have nothing to do with it.

    26. Re: Spying by kurkosdr · · Score: 1

      This was settled when the public had no problem with allowing Gmail to mine their email headers if it meant more storage than Hotmail. The market gives people what the want, not what they should want.

    27. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol.

      The people aware of advertising gimmicks are not nearly as influenced as those who are unaware.

      I've felt online advertising has been a massive gimmick for a long time, and my friends who have run ad campaigns agree that my particular demographic is less susceptible to it all (certain age, certain amount of education, etc.)

    28. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only private free software is noncommercial GPL licensed open source software. Use Lineage OS on your phone and a proprietary-free version of Linux like like PureOS on your PC. A mobile Linux separate from Android is coming eventually.

    29. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Email is inherently not private. People should be using Signal or better for everything.

    30. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're mistaking slashdotters for people who have real life friends and social lives.

    31. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was R Kelly

    32. Re:Spying by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I always find it odd that you can be both competent enough to find Slashdot and still poor. What do you attribute it to? Lack of education? Lack of professional opportunities where you live? Medical problems? Just really curious.

    33. Re: Spying by jon3k · · Score: 1

      anything I want to buy I look up, check, evaluate options, and then decide whether to meh

      I do the exact same thing, but I feel pretty confident that advertising is involved. From subtle advertising for brand awareness (e.g., that Nike ad you saw on the way to work on the side of a bus) to paid placement (e.g., those adword results in the google searches as you researched products). It's never going to outright cause you to pick a specific product, it influences your decision. It most of the time will ensure their product is at least part of the evaluation, which it might not have been otherwise.

    34. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I'm going to write a script that goes through the dictionary and Google's every word. That will f up there analytics. I'll share it with everyone so we can.poison there database with nonsense

    35. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I agree that an Australian ban and buyback would be great; however, it's a hard task to convince 38 states of this constitutional amendment.

      I agree that there's an enforcement problem, but that starts with the president. Because the mental illness gun ban was only an executive order, Trump was able to unilaterally rescind it; so we do need a new law passed by the legislature to make this enforceable, and take him to court when laws are not being enforced.

      The Parkland shooter legally purchased an AR-15, perhaps because agencies did not compare notes during the background check, but again, the president rescinded that executive order as well. Another item that requires a law to be passed, which must then be enforced.

      Some common sense gun laws are actually missing from the books. We cannot rely on executive orders to cover the loopholes, only enactment of the law.

    36. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you watch too much TV. Give the mute button a try once in a while.

    37. Re: Spying by nmo.marques · · Score: 0

      Ivan is not really responsible for neuromarkting. I abandoned my degree in Marketing due to two things: 1. Being hostilized for defending minimal protectionism is key segments of the economy such as health and education. 2. The whole bullshit around neuro-marketing. Go read about neuro-marketing and get a glimpse on it.

    38. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your local beer seller doesn't have the shelf space to stock all the beers. It doesn't even have the shelf space to stock all the beers that its mopolistic distributer deigns to put on offer.

      Advertising is not just aimed at you. It's also aimed at the store owners and managers who make the stocking decisions.

    39. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forget this song, except he was wrong.

      Lay my head on the surgeon's table
      Take my fingerprints if you are able
      Pick my brains pick my pockets
      Steal my eyeballs and come back for the sockets
      Run every kind of test from A to Z
      And you'll still know nothing 'bout me

      Run my name though your computer
      Mention me in passing to your college tutor
      Check my records check my facts
      Check if I paid my income tax
      Pore over everything in my C.V.
      But you'll still know nothing 'bout me
      You'll still know nothing 'bout me- Sting

    40. Re:Spying by BrianMarshall · · Score: 1

      Retired due to health reasons.

      --
      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
    41. Re:Spying by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      I find that impossible to believe. Maybe you have never consciously bought anything due to an ad you saw on a web page.

      I can balance that by there are things I consciously do not buy because I've seen their ad. A brand of chocolates had an advert some years ago that was so silly that I have never bought it since (no problem, the rival brand costs and tastes the same). Also, when choosing between two brands, if all other things are equal (AFAIK), I choose the one that is advertised less because with the other I feel that the money is going into advertising rather than quality.

    42. Re: Spying by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      The ad serves to let you know company A exists at all and is still a player. You absofuckinglutely are influenced. Way, wayyyyyy deeper than you think. In fact, the people who are denying this are easier to influence... Queue xfiles themes..

      I don't need adverts to tell me that Ford and BMW cars exist, or Kellog's cornflakes, or Budweiser beer. I see them around anyway, and I do not buy them anyway (as it happens). I am one of your people denying, but as for my being influenced, I don't even see many adverts. I live in the sticks, never watch TV directly (record programmes and fast forward the ads), and I've got adblocker on. I have a Pentax camera, and Pentax are [in]famous for not advertising (one reason I chose them), and I've never seen my favourite beer (London Pride) advertised either even if you might have done.

    43. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's a good solution to this though.
      Hunt down those that write things like that into their EULAs, and donate their organs to those in need.

      Thousands of lives saved, AND problem solved.

    44. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure it was the latter.

    45. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your naivety.

    46. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NSA's theme song.

    47. Re:Spying by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      Every breath you take,
      Every move you make,
      Every bond you break,
      Every step you take,
      I'll be watching you.
      Sting

      Try The Hymn of Acxiom for a more direct take by Vienna Teng. If you can someone singing into a fan, anyway:

      The Hymn of Acxiom

      somebody hears you. you know that. you know that.
      somebody hears you. you know that inside.
      someone is learning the colors of all your moods, to
      (say just the right thing and) show that you’re understood.
      here you’re known.

      leave your life open. you don’t have. you don’t have.
      leave your life open. you don’t have to hide.
      someone is gathering every crumb you drop, these
      (mindless decisions and) moments you long forgot.
      keep them all.

      let our formulas find your soul.
      we’ll divine your artesian source (in your mind),
      marshal feed and force (our machines will)
      to design you a perfect love—
      or (better still) a perfect lust.
      o how glorious, glorious: a brand new need is born.

      now we possess you. you’ll own that. you’ll own that.
      now we possess you. you’ll own that in time.
      now we will build you an endlessly upward world,
      (reach in your pocket) embrace you for all you’re worth.

      is that wrong?
      isn’t this what you want?
      amen.

    48. Re:Spying by farble1670 · · Score: 2

      Hello there comrade! How goes the trolling today? Well I hope.

      You know that extradition treaties let someone in the US be hauled off to Thailand for execution if they make a crack about the Thai royalty?

      No, they don't. Perhaps in your homeland, but not in the US.

      Eventually some law will be passed that you will violate, and these companies that you don't bother bothering with are going to catch you and you will wind up likely doing some time in a private prison, for someone else's profit.

      No, they won't. People in prison don't contribute to the economy by buying stuff and they don't pay taxes. Corporations like profits. Governments like taxes.

    49. Re:Spying by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      I have never bought anything as a result of seeing an ad on a web page.

      It's a naive person that thinks they aren't effected by advertising. Everyone is.

      If you ask 100 people 99 of them will give an answer like yours: their buying habits aren't effected by advertising. But for some unknown reason, hundreds of billions of dollars are pumped into ads each year. Why do you think that is? Because companies haven't been able to figure out after 100 years and billions spent in market research that ads don't work?

    50. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you bought the things you wanted, but what you wanted was guided by the advertising. Everyone thinks ads don't effect them, but industry pours billions in. Why? Because sales numbers show it does effect them.

      I remember noticing it was 5:00 on the fifth once, and pulling into a local subway, I noticed the song in the back of my head "five, five dollar footling" from the ads, the 5:00 made me think of them and decide I wanted a sub. I insure with Geico because the lizard ads. It's just laziness, when we want something, we query the info in our brains to think of where we can get it, and the ads are there.

      I play another fun game. First you cut your exposure to ads to a minimum. Then whatever advertisement is stuck in your head, you make sure to buy literally anything else. In fact just go straight for no name brands. Chances are they have the least annoying ads if any. Since the most annoying symbol provided by ad is already in your mind, there is no need to do any work except negating the symbol. In other words, buy other shit. As a result the most "successful" ad campaigns suffer the most. You don't have to catch them all, just do the most "damage".

    51. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess you've never heard of the Geo group or Corrections Corporation of America (now called CoreCivic). CCA and other prison companies have written “occupancy guarantees” into their contracts, requiring states to pay a fee if they cannot provide a certain number of inmates.

    52. Re:Spying by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Guess you've never heard of the Geo group or Corrections Corporation of America (now called CoreCivic).

      You're right. I'm not a professional troll like yourself so I wouldn't have.

      CCA and other prison companies have written “occupancy guarantees” into their contracts

      I see. That's pretty much the same as the government rounding up people with evidence from their Facebook pages. It's a perfectly reasonable next step. You're a very smart person and I'm sorry I questioned your mighty brain.

    53. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like sucks! Everything is shit!!

    54. Re: Spying by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Whenever I hear the words "common sense" in a political discussion, I know I'm listening to an idiot telling a lie.

    55. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defend that capitalist police state, yeah!

    56. Re: Spying by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Make the right to privacy unwaivable. Just because we have a terrible legal system now, doesn't mean the law HAS TO be evil.

    57. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many Slashdot posters lack computers and access to the internet.

    58. Re:Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People in prison are utilized for slave labor, where the prison owners make maximum profit off of items produced because they don't have to pay the employee. Not to mention the contracts that guarantee x amount of prisoners at all times or the state has to pay fines TO the prison for not reaching the quota.

    59. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a deep rooted cultural problem in the USA. Many men are unable to feel validated unless they have lots of guns. There is such a large insecurity complex that is bought and paid for by the NRA that a subset of men are psychologically incapable of security unless they have a gun. It might be because they have micropenises as some studies suggest; it might be because of a deep seated fear that borders on mental illness as other studies suggest; it might be something else entirely. But the actual root of the problem is an almost sexual affinity for guns among a subset of people.

      I own guns, but I can also defend myself without them. They're fun to shoot, not a factor of my personality that I would be lost without. The NRA humpers though... the ones who fantasize about their families being burgled and raped so that they got the chance to legally kill someone, they are not normal. And there are more of those types out there then you may suspect.

    60. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I own guns, but I can also defend myself without them.

      Yes, please let us know how that works out when an armed criminal kicks in your door and starts shooting.

      Posthumously, of course, if you stay unarmed.

      "When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act."

      Marko Kloos

    61. Re: Spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've had guns for a very, very long time and yet we are only having these problems relatively quite recently.

      Hi, uh, Strat - long time reader / first time commentator ... to you. I think.

      As you noted, gun muders are down, way down. So you can't really be talking about "yet we are only having these problems relatively quite recently." Or are you?

      Maybe there is something peculiar about these mass killers but I'm somewhat doubtful. In your quote, "these problems" could well be the unnatural focus on these murders (by people who are of no meaningful (!) relation to the victims). It's like grieving over Anastasia or some other BS. It's not even a statistic like the holocaust victims.

      So, I think the 'problem' people have is that ... they are the problem and don't know it. Like you don't get what you want in one area and start demanding something in another area. It could be the bargaining stage of grief over not winning in 2016 (I'd argue, there were few winners). "Oh I have to hail to President Trump, then take away all our guns so we can't fight back!" (lol - they don't think exactly like that but close enough)

      And a last thing, I would not bring back old institutions or olds ways (incarceration without trial, due cause) of dealing with mental health. That's in the past and deserves to stay there. We well know that things would LIKELY be better without the overuse of SSRTs and opioids. Both fill niches where recreationally-classified drugs could likely meat a majority of use cases with far less danger, less cost, less untested medications on a populace.

      So, no, I don't trust them to do 'mental health'. The ball dropped here is the joke behind 'see something, say something'. They just want to watch the trainwreck too or groom these people to press a big ready phoney 'blow-people-up' button (something that ought be called entrapment but is legalized enticement). The 3-letter agencies want product to sell, they don't want us safe. Let's be honest here ... they're not trying.

  2. Hmm... by SurenEnfiajyan · · Score: 2

    Is this site spying to me?

    1. Re:Hmm... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 4, Informative

      Lets see: Scripts I can see running:
      slashdot.org
      adnxs.com
      advertising.com
      contextweb.com
      crsspxl.com
      d3tglifpd8whs6.cloudfront.net
      districtm.ca
      fsdn.com
      google-analytics.com
      googletagservices.com
      janrain.com
      licdn.com
      lijit.com
      ml314.com
      pro-market.net
      rpxnow.com
      rubiconproject.com
      slashdotmedia.com
      stack-sonar.com
      taboola.com
      truste.com

      So, maybe just a little bit.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    2. Re:Hmm... by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Funny thing, that Duckduckgo privacy essentials actually gives slashdot a B rating lol its a total joke and makes one wonder what the hell are they thinking..

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    3. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing that baffles me the most when sites do this, is how stupid to the siterunners have to be? I mean like, when you're adding scripts and you get to the 20th one and you realize you need 20 different scripts to get the 20 analytics you want each with their own 20 kitchen sinks and 20 foreign corps getting a 'free' copy of your analytics to use to sell ads to your competitors... at what point do they go, hmm, maybe I should write my own analytics script or install piwik or something.

    4. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      absolutely, in fact it is pretty bad with the number of spy based sites embedded on here. check the scripts and cookies you get and give when you come here.

    5. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah I can see Noscript blocking all of that...

    6. Re:Hmm... by cats-paw · · Score: 1

      don't you mean those are the scripts that _want_ to run, but can't because you're running noscript and it's blocking them...

      --
      Absolute statements are never true
    7. Re:Hmm... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 4, Informative

      You know you can still see them even if you allow them to run, right?
      But when I look at it, once you give temp permissions it reloads with even more scripts that I then had to allow.
      In addition to the above list, that added:
      a3cloud.net
      acuityplatform.com
      bidswitch.net
      d29usylhdk1xyu.cloudfront.net
      d6uon097akywu.cloudfront.net
      demdex.net
      districtm.io
      dotomi.com
      doubleclick.net
      google.com
      janrain.xyz
      linkedin.com
      scorecardresearch.com
      sitescout.com
      trustarc.com
      Now I have to kill all the temp permissions and just leave the ones I must allow in order to use /.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    8. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The thing that baffles me the most when sites do this, is how stupid to the siterunners have to be? I mean like, when you're adding scripts and you get to the 20th one and you realize you need 20 different scripts to get the 20 analytics you want each with their own 20 kitchen sinks and 20 foreign corps getting a 'free' copy of your analytics to use to sell ads to your competitors... at what point do they go, hmm, maybe I should write my own analytics script or install piwik or something.

      These are not analytics for the site owner. They are third parties who pay the site owner to get data about the site owner's users. The site owners aren't being stupid - in many cases this is the best way for them to get money.

    9. Re:Hmm... by jalbarl25 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In which browser? Firefox's new NoScript add-on is a joke, and Chrome was always hostile towards it.

      --
      The technology graveyard is full of zombies (alvinrod)
    10. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This site works with most of those blocked by NoScript. Why haven't you done that?
      Along with UBlock I keep my web presence minimised.

    11. Re:Hmm... by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      WTF? Running scripts other than slashdot? Man, your uBlock/uMatrix/NoScript must be off.

    12. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I have *none at all* because I block ALL js.
      It has its cost, but I will gladly pay that. Most sites I want to look at work well enough without. On rare occasions a site needs JS enabled such as when I buy from amazon, it happens in a VM.
      You let this happen. You chose. Don't complain.

    13. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I forgot to say, I block all cookies too.

    14. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firefox's new NoScript add-on is a joke

      In what way? Open up the network traffic inspector (Ctrl+Shift+E) and you can see that blocked script calls are not being made. Isn't that what the add-on purports to do?

    15. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are thousands of domains that need to be blocked, and they're very dynamic, so that in a short while the ad blocker is out of date. It's hard to keep updated, so you really need to use a dynamic system on your own, instead of relying on third parties. A good combination is the unbound caching DNS resolver with some kind of domain collector (squid can work). Google it.

  3. Nice try Google and Facebook by Kohath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We know you're trying to muddy the waters and use the "everybody does it" rationalization. "Thousands of companies" aren't using search and social networking and Android monopoly power to spy on us like you guys are. It's only you doing that.

    "Thousand of companies" also don't have PR problems due to arrogant, dismissive management. That's a Google and Facebook problem.

    "Thousands of companies" haven't lost the trust of their audience by trying to impose Silicon Valley "values" on them. That's a Google and Facebook problem.

    1. Re:Nice try Google and Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just companies. Governments do it, too.

    2. Re:Nice try Google and Facebook by HiThere · · Score: 1

      While it's true that

      "Thousands of companies" haven't lost the trust of their audience by trying to impose

      most companies with web presence try to use cookies to trace people. Often, admittedly, only to improve service, but you can't know what their purposes are, and so many lie that you can't trust their explanations.

      Do you actually think you can use a credit card anywhere without *some* company spying on you? You can argue justification, and that's not totally wrong, but it doesn't change the actuality. And any time "customer data" is lost in a security breach, you know that some amount of spying by the business on their customers is going on. You just don't know how much.

      Also, someone is paying to keep those people selling personal information in business. All those who buy that information are spying, often on people who have no business relationship with them or knowledge of their activities.

      So saying thousands of companies are spying on you probably isn't hyperbole, and it's likely an underestimate. How thoroughly they are spying is another question, and we don't know, and aren't allowed to know, the answer. Experian certainly hasn't been very forthcoming about what kind of information was lost, but is seems likely it was enough to allow anyone to open an account in the name of anyone in their database.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:Nice try Google and Facebook by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      "Thousands of companies" aren't using search and social networking and Android monopoly power to spy on us like you guys are. It's only you doing that.

      You're right. Only a few companies are doing that, the others wanted to do that from the onset but didn't get the market capture to succeed. You may not remember registration cards, loyalty programs, surveys, but this concept long pre-dates the internet, hell it was a feature of electronic payment.

      "Thousand of companies" also don't have PR problems due to arrogant, dismissive management. That's a Google and Facebook problem.

      Actually they quite often do. The difference is if you don't have 2bn customers around the world your PR tends to be more localised. Think only a few years back when Target started sending a pregnant girl advertisements for kids stuff which upset her parents ... who didn't know she was pregnant. Target knew.

      "Thousands of companies" haven't lost the trust of their audience by trying to impose Silicon Valley "values" on them. That's a Google and Facebook problem.

      Actually that isn't even a Google / Facebook problem. The users don't care, at best a couple of investors caused the shareprice to dro... oh look it's rising again.

    4. Re:Nice try Google and Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, there really are thousands of companies spying on you. The difference is that you don't see most of them unless you care to look. Facebook and Google are just very visible and they do more spying, but the rest is there too, and if Google and Facebook were to vanish tomorrow, your data would still be pilfered by someone else.

    5. Re:Nice try Google and Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And google and Facebook are enablers for many of these companies allowing said companies unnecessary access to your data.

    6. Re:Nice try Google and Facebook by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      And google and Facebook are enablers for many of these companies allowing said companies unnecessary access to your data.

      Please link to any data breach associated with Google, or where I can buy Google user data.

    7. Re: Nice try Google and Facebook by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Have patience, it will happen.

    8. Re: Nice try Google and Facebook by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      And when it does, I'll address it. Until then, I don't need to make up imaginary problems. There are enough real ones.

  4. No Shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How in the fuck is anyone surprised by this? This has been, or should have been, well fucking known for years now.

    Jesus folks. Start paying attention.

    1. Re: No Shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes and long before the internet was commercialized. It is no surprise except to those who are concerned about the gambling going on in the back rooms.

    2. Re: No Shit by javaman235 · · Score: 1

      I've know all this for years, but the Facebook thing hit me hard.

      I mean think about it, you go to a restaurant, you give them money, they give you a cupcake. The cupcake pays nothing, but things don't end well for it.

      The thing I realize now is I AM THE CUPCAKE with these companies. I thought it was about it them living of venture capital building user base waiting to monetize, I thought money from advertising meant other fools were paying for it all by clicking on ads and I had the game beat, but what it really means is them selling access to intelligence on my life to shadowy third parties, for questionable ends. That's a huge perceptual shift.

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    3. Re: No Shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you admit being one of Zuck's dumbfucks?

  5. Just like casinos by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's just like casinos. If everyone was winning money in them, they wouldn't be able to afford to keep the lights on. If you're using something a company provides to you without paying for it, then it's really you who's the product.

    1. Re: Just like casinos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not like casinos at all (seriously, this is where you go to? You have a problem?) but the point is similar. Targeted marketing to keep the fish on the hook.

    2. Re:Just like casinos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Darn tootin. I'm the best product money could buy.

    3. Re: Just like casinos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it does not mean that "you are the product."

      It simply means that the thing you are getting "for free" you are paying for in some way.

      This "you are the product" meme sounded clever for awhile but it's getting tiresome.

      The transaction is no different, though the process is now more intrusive, than how commercial radio and television had been since the mid 20th century.

  6. This is why I always browse the internet by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Funny

    in the nude. If they're gonna spy on me let them pay for it in the worst way possible.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:This is why I always browse the internet by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      You're not the goatse guy are you?

    2. Re:This is why I always browse the internet by Stan92057 · · Score: 2

      The NSA have been collecting web cam images for years from Yahoo Messenger cam users no warrants.

      https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    3. Re:This is why I always browse the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rsilvergun is counting on it.

  7. If you're into conspiracies, by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 3, Informative

    a good primer on manipulation is The Rape of the Mind: The Psychology of Thought Control, Menticide, and Brainwashing by Swedish Psychologist Joost Meerloo

    1. Re:If you're into conspiracies, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or "Propaganda" by Jacques Ellul. Slightly older (written in the 60s) but still a very thought-provoking read.

  8. It's rather depressing by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I bring this up with many (perhaps most) of my friends and co-workers, the prevalent attitude seems to be "we've already lost, there's no reason to resist".

    Another thing is when I mention it at work - what I hear back from certain faculty is how Google and Amazon are giving us a lot of money, so we're going to pretend none of this is a concern.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:It's rather depressing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Simple minds usually need to reduce their world to "us-them" terms. Similarly, if less obviously, is the need to reduce scenarios to binary conditions. Won/lost.

      There are thousands of vectors using thousands of approaches seeking thousands of data points, relying on thousands of dependencies. Almost of them are invisible.

      That last part only furthers the argument to spray-and-pray. Don't bother figuring out which are fallible. And certainly don't be so naive as to think you'll find them.

      You don't seal your walls against a particular insect.
      You don't seal your walls after reading that some bug in some state hits certain houses.
      You don't add sealant to the ONE floor seam you saw ants at.
      You do seal preemptively and indiscriminately.
      You don't practice food storage AFTER insects show up.
      You don't abandon the effort because "it's impossible to keep every spider out ever we lost".
      You don't abandon the effort because "well i don't see any insects here do you"

      Use the tools and practices you're capable of. Not everyone's a professional exterminator, and not everyone's running a useragent generator behind a VPN. So be it. Some people are browsing on IE8. So be it.

      "I don't understand poison chemistry" doesn't mean you leave food on the fucking floor.
      "they (a static entity lol) already know me" doesn't mean you put your SSN on a billboard outside your house.

      Resist. Employ defensive practices. Don't throw one wrench into one machine; spew indiscriminately, they're invisible anyway.

      We've been swimming in databases for 20 years, you've already BEEN careful with phone/address/creditcard info. You don't need to know who, or how, or what is used, to understand the value of discretion.

    2. Re:It's rather depressing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the 'spying' is something you agree to. I mean its clear from the EULA that your data can be stored and managed, anonomized or not.

      So its like using a credit card, or the phone, etc etc there is a record of your activity, and that activity can be monetized TO YOUR BENEFIT. REALLY. Take an app like google maps. You use it, you're tracked. But for the 'cost' of this pretty useless data (oh noes, they know I went to some place!) you get up to date mapping, real time traffic and local search functions. How much would you pay for that.. per use? per month? per year? Standalone GPS maps are nowhere near as convenient as google maps.

      So I think the trade is a very fair one.

      If anything I wish they would use the data they collect to give me ads for things I need. My advertising profile (single white male, mid 40's) should tell them that no, I don't need makeup or kids toys.... but I still those ads on google sites (youtube).

    3. Re:It's rather depressing by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Do you also hear about why people happily hand over data? Google knows my location as I travel down the highway. That's scary. A company like that could provide real time traffic information that makes my trip to work better. Just one example, but the bottom line is people don't use Google and Facebook for the exercise of handing over their data if they didn't get something in return.

      The same applies to membership programs. I'm not a Marriott member because I want them spying on me, and knowing which airline I fly. I am a member because in exchange for the inconsequential information I get rewards that make the exercise worth while.

  9. Database Nation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.amazon.com/Database-Nation-Death-Privacy-Century/dp/0596001053

    Database Nation : The Death of Privacy in the 21st Century

    Written over eighteen years ago and still relevant.

  10. HAHA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Advertising? You really think this is about selling you trash?

    This is the New World Order's wet dream.

    Having any and all information to hang over any challengers stupid enough to think Justice and Liberty for all.

    It's over folks. And you can thank the dumb bastards who cry "tin foil hat conspiracy theory" at any and all suggestions that "our" leaders aren't serving their constituents and their nation.

    Good bye... it hasn't been fun and it will get much much worse before things improve. 1984 was written in 1948... and the author was very late to the game even then.

    1. Re:HAHA! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Actually, what I read was that 1984 was a fictionalized presentation of what Orwell saw in Spain in 1948. He was describing a present, not warning of a future. If you want warning, you can make a better case for Animal Farm. Not that people paid attention to either.

      But he wasn't late to the game. Centralized control by non-human actors wasn't possible even in 1948, though it had started by then. Prior attempts depended on compliance of local political leaders, and fell apart when, e.g., Henry VIII wanted a divorce the pope didn't want to give him. (Not that Henry was much better from the viewpoint of the local populace. And that lead to a series of civil wars.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:HAHA! by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      I couldn't help hearing a Russian accent when reading.

      It's over folks.

      What is over is the Russian propaganda machine. In 2 years your tactics will be so out in the open they'll be useless, and you'll be sent back to the potato farm away from your cushy job trolling the filthy westerners.

  11. I just assume they are all spying on me by bobstreo · · Score: 2

    Now if someone would compile a list of companies who aren't watching every click and hover, that would be helpful.

    1. Re:I just assume they are all spying on me by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      There may be another.
      Not really.

  12. Regulation is a poor solution to better choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Regulation is a poor solution to people making better choices. I choose not to own a "smart" TV. I don't utilize any Facebook, Apple, or Microsoft product and little of Google outside of search- and even that much I avoid. I utilize a stripped down version of Android without the proprietary Google parts and I'm trying to get away from cellular devices. I work toward elimination of drivers licenses, license plates, vehicular registration, and similar. Simply put its nobody else's business and 'free' and 'safety' and 'easier' are all poor excuses for censorship and tracking. I may not be able to totally avoid these things today- let alone whats coming- but it is at least within my power to fight these Orwellian government actions and choose to NOT utilize products and services of companies which endanger my privacy.

    I moved to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project so that I could join other like minded individuals in pursuing better policies and eliminating regulations that would provide me and others with a small part of the world under which our freedoms and liberties are not sacrificed for reasons of "safety", "think of the children", and so on.

    1. Re:Regulation is a poor solution to better choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...I moved to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project so that I could join other like minded individuals in pursuing better policies and eliminating regulations that would provide me and others with a small part of the world under which our freedoms and liberties are not sacrificed for reasons of "safety", "think of the children", and so on.

      Ah, so you fell for the bait and switch scheme.

      Sorry, but all your base belong to us.

    2. Re:Regulation is a poor solution to better choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Companies are not going to give up their moneymaker, and there are likely people who need services on their job. For example, a lot of places use Facebook for organizing events.

      The Libertarian style of "let businesses make a profit" doesn't work. 1929 and 2008 showed this to be true. Hell, Europe is so pissed at US companies that they enacted sweeping laws just to go against them, which US countries can't abide by due to domestic legislation (the CLOUD act.)

      The only way to fix this is with regulation.

    3. Re:Regulation is a poor solution to better choices by shilly · · Score: 1

      You describe what you've had to do to go off-grid, and it's extraordinarily restrictive. And you think *regulation* is a poor solution? Sheesh.

    4. Re:Regulation is a poor solution to better choices by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      I choose not to own a "smart" TV. I don't utilize any Facebook, Apple, or Microsoft product and little of Google outside of search- and even that much I avoid. I utilize a stripped down version of Android without the proprietary Google parts and I'm trying to get away from cellular devices.

      And yet, how is your life better than mine? What tangible difference has depriving corporations of your user data made in your life?

      I mean, beyond allowing you to feel superior than the rest of us. That' clearly an advantage.

      choose to NOT utilize products and services of companies which endanger my privacy

      How are you endangered? Please, nothing hypothetical.

      I work toward elimination of drivers licenses, license plates, vehicular registration, and similar.

      Ah yes. The "I don't want to pay taxes so I'll couch it as a privacy issue" approach. Nice one!

      I moved to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project so that I could join other like minded individuals

      Hot hippie babes. Got it.

  13. they are not the only ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about all those customer bonus cards - just about every brand out there has one... you think you get those discounts for free? they are no doubt selling your shopping choices as well.

    1. Re: they are not the only ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's for getting stuff at a discount. By allowing them to use my purchasing history for their purchasing and distribution logistics. Seems like an ok deal to me.

    2. Re: they are not the only ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's cute how you think that's all they do with it.

    3. Re: they are not the only ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are they selling it to and for what purpose?

  14. Late stage capitalism a go-go by nimbius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the idea originally was that capitalism was driven by endless consumerism and that companies would compete using the quality and features of their product. then a few things happened that Milton Friedman probably did not see coming. automation made the quality of competing products indistinguishable, and products with complete feature sets inevitably damaged repeat sales. Automation also drove the price of manufacturing so low that companies could not possibly continue on the demanded path of 15% growth per quarter in earnings.

    somewhere around the late seventies America shifted from a product sold based on merit of quality, to a product sold based on a brand that identified with the consumers desire. Since human emotion drives desire, its theoretically endless. Soon products exploited sexual impotency, race, gender, and status to sell themselves. The end result was that companies could grow ad-infinitum so long as consumers never stopped to question conspicuous consumption, and remained divorced from the means of production which into the 21st century grew increasingly indistinguishable from slavery. Finally we have companies that literally spy on the hopes, dreams, and fears of an entire generation of adults in order for the mere potential to make a sale.

    You might not be able to avoid the spycraft, but you can certainly derail its end goal. Reduce, reuse, and recycle goods you buy. Avoid major brands, and branded consumer holidays like Christmas. Repair instead of replacing old coats, gloves, and household small appliances. Look up a cobbler in your city, as there certainly exists one or more, and resole your shoes and boots instead of buying new ones.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:Late stage capitalism a go-go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well spoken ... and not the usual speech. Can you quantitate the dead-end of quality/quantity perfection ? How did people switch from measuring function to measuring desirability ? Or was it a by-product corruption of the "womens movement" !

    2. Re:Late stage capitalism a go-go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the socialists are not using it to suppress free speech as we type this in? Their 1920-1940s talking points are alive and well and being shoved at us like they are something new. Yours among them.

      Are your own thoughts yours or did someone put them there? https://fanaticcook.com/2015/0...

      You would be more surprised than you think. When you say something did you come up with it, or did someone stroke your ego and make you think you came up with it.

    3. Re:Late stage capitalism a go-go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the surface this appears correct but has some issues. "Something" didn't just happen, it was forced. What I mean is we didn't just decide brandnames were better, we're however faced with cheap knock offs that quite literally may kill us (laced with lead for example).

      I don't particularity have a problem with products tailoring themselves to specific markets either, that is healthy.

      Consumerism is not in of itself a bad thing, what has happened however is there's no real regulation. Companies are not fined based on their net worth but usually some tiny settlement at a fraction of the cost. This allows them to be ignorant.

      Governments should have stepped in a LONG, long time ago when companies like Walmart created these problems. Instead we're being forced to believe short term "job growth" is paramount above all else which is quite irresponsible from any Government.

      Considering that "wealth" is based on inflated economics, until Governments around the world can unite against the so called 1%, I don't see this ever changing.. They will just keep moving money around virtually.

    4. Re:Late stage capitalism a go-go by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      You might not be able to avoid the spycraft, but you can certainly derail its end goal. Reduce, reuse, and recycle goods you buy. Avoid major brands, and branded consumer holidays like Christmas. Repair instead of replacing old coats, gloves, and household small appliances. Look up a cobbler in your city, as there certainly exists one or more, and resole your shoes and boots instead of buying new ones.

      While the goal is noble you've just described being poor and that carries a stigma of its own. Your 5 times repaired coat is not likely to get you a pat on the back for sticking it to the man as much as confused looks from the people around you saying you should be buying a new one.

      Society has helped kill the repair scene.

    5. Re:Late stage capitalism a go-go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The worry over one's social capital is part of the problem. If everyone stopped caring about these things we could move past stigmas. Be the change you want to see in the world rather than seek constant approval.

  15. Only one company should spy on me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When summer gets here, the only thing hotter than the weather is your hemorrhoids. That's when you need the cool, comfortable relief of Preparation-H. Preparation-H will help you get on your way.

  16. missing tag.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #NoShitSherlock

  17. Regulation by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 1

    Is always the answer. (sigh)

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re: Regulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It probably works as well as the regulation of banking and finance: instead of criminalizing fraud, the governments have turned to the experts of fraud to invent the best regulations money can buy.

      Talk about the hugely complex thing called internet then. If violations of privacy is to be regulated, one needs to turn to the experts.

  18. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With such a lack of privacy, why do we bother to wear clothes? Is it only due to feeling cold?

  19. Before the Internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked in a research lab. Management wanted us to lock our office doors at night. I had two arguments against this: 1) The cleaning staff unlocked all offices on every floor en masse, before cleaning, not each separately; 2) Anyone let loose in my office for an entire night to read everything in it would be more confused after than before.

    1. Re:Before the Internet by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you encrypted all of your work. Kudos to you.

  20. I reserve the right to completely ignore by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    and mock your paranoid concept of a new world order.

    Isn't that just code for some ethnocultural group that you particularly despise?

    Get a grip and worry about your own shit. You just wish that whatever you're doing was important enough that some mysterious figment of your fevered brain cabal would actually care to include a moment's thought about you in their grand plan. Get a feckin' grip.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  21. If they give companies "personhood", by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    First order of business should be a stalking charge.

  22. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Is it only due to feeling cold?

    Well, that's probably exactly how clothes became a thing... The rest is just societal brainwashing.

  23. The internet undermines.. by blahplusplus · · Score: 2

    ... people's ability to influence company policies, nowhere is this seen more clearly then videogames and the tech community more generally. Basically companies have literally taken software hostage, literally theft. The new model is to undermine ownership of peoples software and machines and turn them into dumb walled garden terminals.

    The reason is technology has undermined the very basis of western civ by companies NOT having to physically give you a product they can cut the software into pieces and keep part of it on their server which forces radical transparency and complete lack of privacy. The only way out would be to have some kind of say in how these companies are run and most people are too stupid and ideologically kept to capitalism. A rational society would see private ownership model is impossible post interneet because you'd need geographic proximity to force companies to stop producing software and other tech in a fraudulent and hostile manner. Most people are too ignorant, unconcerned and illiterate to request the policies that would force companies to stop basically comiting fraud on a massive scale. But either way the internet finally breaks any kind of consumer or power the general public might have had to influence companies.

    And don't give me any "consumer has a choice" bs, the only way you'd have a choice is if you had money and power co equal to the bottomless well of cash on hand at the behest of mega corporations this is not an individual problem. It's the natural result of technology undermining the basis of the relationship where companies can simply now force policies they could never get away with pre internet because they wouldn't get paid pre internet they had to give you control over the thing you were buying.

  24. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has nothing to do with capitalism.

  25. even your government is in on it . by swell · · Score: 2

    In my case it's the city, county, state and federal government. They require me to interact via MailChimp and similar services. They process financial transactions and set appointments via outside services. Presumably the bureaucrats are saving money by giving up citizens' privacy. Possibly some particular bureaucrat is getting a kickback from these companies.

    These services typically don't identify themselves- at the top of every page is the logo of a government agency, even though the URL is for a dot com. They are fraudulently impersonating the government at our expense! And, of course you won't find any privacy policy on those pages except perhaps that of the government. If you do find the corporation and its privacy policy, it will say that they may share your data with 'affiliates', which means anyone they want to call an affiliate when the mood strikes them.

    If you have a driver license, social security account, military connection, utility bills, or any other business with any government--you may have no alternative. Oh, by the way, many non-profits are also selling you out this way.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:even your government is in on it . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, governments are in on it (as well as the judiciary) since courts have ruled that when the government doesn't get a warrant, they can still legally obtain any data that is bought from a private company. It's clearly and end run around the 4th amendment and it won't stop unless we get the amendment clarified to state that a persons effects include digital devices that one owns.

      Worse, some companies use gmail. It's invisible to many people inside and outside of the company. You use an @thecompany.com address and don't realize that G-ogle is watching your email. They admit to scanning all email. G-ogle even popped up a message on my once that said "you usually copy Jane on these types of messages. Do you want to add Jane this time?"

      Some companies also use Paychex or ADP to process payroll. The next time you apply for a job, the prospective employer buys your pay history to lowball you with their offer. You didn't even know that info, which used to be closely held by employers, is now available for money and you get no say or part in the process.

      Retailers are recording info when you return defective products. Now many of them are sharing the information, ostensibly to reduce fraud, and companies may decide you have returned too much crap and refuse a refund. It might even be a company you haven't dealt with but they know you bought defective products at other retailers.

      The government loves this because they can buy information from one of the data brokers that you don't even know about and put together a dossier that knows things about you that you don't even know about you.

  26. What to do by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Find an OS that does not have spying on users as part of every release.
    Get a good VPN and put that in a router. So every network connection is not from your IP and ISP.
    Support a good AV brand that finds a lot of malware and nation funded spyware.
    Put no script and use other methods to protect a browser.
    Look into who is creating and funding the browser. Are they pro privacy?
    Dont use social media.
    Dont let social media get your cell phone details.
    Don't connect a "smart" TV to the internet. Use a stand alone device just for streaming.
    Dont bring in a networked microphone and camera product from a company that sells ads.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:What to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Find an OS that does not have spying on users as part of every release.

      Define spying. Yes, even Linux unfortunately leaks data. See Ubuntu.

      Get a good VPN and put that in a router. So every network connection is not from your IP and ISP.

      This is becoming increasingly difficult. Even CDNs like Cloudflare are quite aggressive toward public vpn providers. Some sites won't function at all if they detect (more like told), you're behind a vpn.

      Support a good AV brand that finds a lot of malware and nation funded spyware.

      Like? AFAIK they all are.

      Put no script and use other methods to protect a browser.

      Not only does no script not work on all devices but it provides very little overall protection.

      Look into who is creating and funding the browser. Are they pro privacy?

      Irrelevant. "Privacy" has been redefined to mean different things to different people.

      Dont use social media.

      Define Social Media. You mean don't use Facebook, Youtube, Google, Reddit, etc. Technically even Steam falls under the term.

      Dont let social media get your cell phone details.

      See above, also quite difficult if not impossible.

      Don't connect a "smart" TV to the internet. Use a stand alone device just for streaming.

      You mean don't get a smart tv period.

      Dont bring in a networked microphone and camera product from a company that sells ads.

      You mean at all. Selling ads has nothing to do with it at least.

      Suggestions are bad so much as misleading. The only way to deal with this kind of crap is call out and prohibit companies that engage in such practices.

    2. Re:What to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ubuntu != Linux

    3. Re:What to do by raind · · Score: 1

      Aren't you using social media now?

      --
      Get up!
    4. Re: What to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux != GNU+Linux

      -RMS

    5. Re:What to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use Tails Linux.

      If a site blocks VPNs, don't use it. There are tons of other sites.

      ClamAV.

      NoScript works fine on Firefox across all devices.

      Irrelevant. There is software that fits every definition. Use the software that fits yours.

      Don't use anything where you need to create an account, and if you must, don't publish any content. You're free to not enter any comments or participate in discussions on Steam.

      See above, don't own a cell phone, use a Google Voice number or buy a SIM card in cash and then never use it for anything else.

      Yes, just buy a dumb monitor, they exist.

      No kidding, of course at all.

    6. Re:What to do by jonesy16 · · Score: 1

      Firstly, I don't particularly care whether the whole of the internet knows my shopping / browsing history, likes and dislikes. I'll enable some basic privacy measures mostly to limit ads because I dislike those resource hogs, but by and large I don't consider myself to be interesting enough for others to give a damn. But from a rhetorical standpoint, how does one truly eliminate their exposure to this while still interacting with others who don't?

      Take email for example, I could set up my own email server and avoid Google cataloging every email I've ever sent or received, but it won't protect me from them gathering that information from other Google users I send emails to or receive emails from ...

      You have very little control over the collection / creation of your credit history and it's essential for most basic aspects of living, so going to a cash-only state of being likely isn't realistic.

      I just don't see how we can truly eliminate the threat. People are so accustomed to the services we enjoy and are certainly accustomed to not paying much for them. If every site wanted to exist without being a surveillance threat, you'd have to pay to keep each site online, and most people won't do that.

    7. Re: What to do by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Thats the idea AC. Some reading can find the great OS that protect user data.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:What to do by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Why avoid the advancements of HD, 4K, 8K and new codecs AC? Just don't allow the advanced networked TV to use its spyware, mic and cam to collect on the user.
      Bring data to the display. Use a streaming device to support just one streaming service when needed.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  27. Re: Regulation is a poor solution to better choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Regulation = piling on another layer.

    The complete opposite of fixing the problem.

    Privacy laws like they have implemented in Europe is the solution.

    'Regulation' is Zuckerberg saying "noooo, don't throw me in the biar patch!"

  28. Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you aren't ising a good VPN, private browsing tabs, and a host of plugins, you are naked. There is no such thing as safe out of the box connectivity in the 21st century. *Everyone* is trying to collect data on you, all of the time. Be smart.

  29. Another brilliant insight by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

    No shit, Sherlock. Of course they are trying to find out everything possible about every potential consumer. They have always done that, from the invention of commerce in maybe 8000 BC. It's just that a lot more information that is easily available (for a pittance) than ever before.

         

    1. Re:Another brilliant insight by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      You underestimate totally the power of gossipy women since roughly 8000 B.C. Profiling, demographics, data mining. 3rd party tracking....those "stitch and bitch" sewing circle sessions had it all

  30. Has it to be an *Amazon* link? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jeez.

    Here's an alternative link which doesn't spy on you:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    C'mon, folks. We *can* do better around here, can't we?

  31. Poor spies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel kinda bad for them. Spending all that effort to profile me and me without any money to spend on their (clients) products.

  32. Re: Spying and porn getting better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not if it is DT and [she who must not be named] it won't... Doh!

  33. Good luck to them; I don't see targeted ads and by tanstaaf1 · · Score: 1

    The article says "Regulation is the only answer.The first step to any regulation is transparency." That's defeatist, bordering on transparently inane. Since sufficient regulation is unlikely to happen in our lifetimes, because our government is both implicated and corrupt, waiting for "regulation" by a government body is kind of like saying "accept it". I don't accept much of anything and my standard of opting out keeps going higher. I block ALL ads in general website hopping and increasingly use Qubes &/or Tor to scrub my browsing. If I use firefox I've got like 5 different blockers running all the time (slashdot now shows with most graphics and formatting stripped and HTML tags all over the place). Of course I don't often use google, bing, or anything but startpage for my search engine. And I try to fuck with google & bing for kicks in my idle moments - I may be a loss leader for them. ;-/ I don't use "Android"; only low class people use Android, selling their Manhattan for trinkets. I've got my fingers crossed for Purism/PureOS. If a site whines or simply forbids my blocking, I generally ignore the complaints or move on. Sometimes I will use the article title to find an alternate source. Anyway, there are a LOT of things you can do to sidestep the Dystopia most people are bending over and lubing up for, Stop complaining and start acting up both actively and passive-agressively. You have more power than you think. Don't waste your time trying to "vote" corruption out of the government. If some privacy regulation someday comes down the pike that may be nice ... but more likely it will be just another con or system of control.

  34. Privacy / data protection would be a start by DrXym · · Score: 3, Informative
    European law requires companies that hold personally identifiable data to ensure it is relevant to the service they provide, that the person has consented to its use, and restricts their ability to aggregate or sell that data to others. And if a company violates that law they can expect extremely harsh fines - something that may happen when the UK's ICO is done with Cambridge Analytica. In fact the EU has just updated the rules with a new general data protection regulation which clarifies the right to be forgotten, financial redress for breaches, automated credit scoring and other things.

    So if the US wants to see where it should be going, look to Europe. The problem of course is it will never happen. Legislators are afraid of the data collection industry and would be too chicken shit to do anything to meaningfully rein it in.

  35. European Union GDPR by Jezral · · Score: 2

    The first step to any regulation is transparency. Who has our data? Is it accurate? What are they doing with it? Who are they selling it to? How are they securing it? Can we delete it...?

    That and much more is what the EU General Data Protection Regulation mandates. Now we just need to push it to the rest of the world via trade treaties.

  36. Targeting the REAL problem. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Surveillance Capitalism isn't the real problem. What feeds it, is. Bruce ignorantly assumes that people still give a shit about privacy. Professional Narcissist and Attention Whore are now paid professions, and oversharing is considered a social mantra. The masses worry about privacy about as much as a porn star worries about having sex in front of a camera.

    In order to enact change, you have to get people to start giving a shit about privacy again, which would likely mean no more free internet services, including social media. With GenY/Z, good luck with that shit.

  37. News? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Seriously - anyone at all who can put two thoughs together knows that teh intertoobz has bee collecting our data for years now - I have no idea how this is supposed to be news. While the user can keep some of the tracking and dta grabbing from happening, overall, the Internet has zero privacy, and the more extreme attempts at cloaking just make a person interesting.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  38. How the debate went by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) People will say they want it stopped
    2) The heads of the guilty companies will say "over our dead bodies"
    3) The government will be paid off enough to realize the only way to stop it would be to allow peasants to kill some rich people
    4) So their decision will be to make it retroactively legal and to make refusing "participation" in all the privacy violations a crime
    5) Both official statements and the media companies owned by those doing this to the population will extol the decision, condemning the evils of the terrorist-supporting law-enforcement-haters who have something to hide, and ban them from travel, housing and other things since their social score is now too low

  39. Re: Regulation is a poor solution to better choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You tell 'em, Hunter! The Goog is gonna give to a *sweet* bonus. This is some quality work, bro.

  40. public secret by sad_ · · Score: 1

    this is known for a long time already, why is everybody acting so surprised these days about all these privacy issues?

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  41. Re: Regulation is a poor solution to better choice by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    The Goog is gonna give to a *sweet* bonus.

    I'm still waiting.