Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Consumers' Privacy Concerns Not Backed By Their Actions (betanews.com)

Posted by msmash on from the little-willpower dept.

Ian Barker, writing for BetaNews: A large majority of people say they are concerned about their online privacy, but this is not reflected in their actions according to a new study. The survey from Blue Fountain Media reveals that 90 percent of respondents are very concerned about their internet privacy and 48 percent wish 'more was being done about it.' Yet despite this 60 percent of those polled happily download apps without reading terms and conditions, and close to 20 percent still download apps even when they have read the terms and don't like them. A third of those polled say they would delete an app that tracks their whereabouts, but 50 percent say whether they would do so depends how much they like the app. Interestingly less than 10 percent believe an app that tracks their location is actually useful to them.

14 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. D'oh by NettiWelho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet despite this 60 percent of those polled happily download apps without reading terms and conditions,

    Yeah I can't afford to hire a lawyer for 5-9 hours every time I install an app

    1. Re:D'oh by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even without a lawyer, the cost of maintaining your privacy is too high these days. Suppose it takes you an hour to read all of the various privacy policies for Facebook in several different places. That's over 2 billion hours spent, just for one app, both when you install it and, potentially, every time they update the privacy policy. That would translate to an economic cost (if you assume U.S. minimum wage) of about $15.5 billion worldwide. Multiply that times the average number of apps that people install plus the average number of websites that people use.

      Then, on top of that cost, you have to assume that the least reputable businesses won't actually follow their privacy policy, or will deliberately carve out exceptions that don't sound bad until you see how they use them. If you assume that everyone is behaving ethically, then privacy policies aren't needed, and if you assume that everyone is behaving unethically, then privacy policies do no good.

      It doesn't take much effort, then, to understand why the only way to fix this is through laws that require a certain minimum set of privacy rights for every app and website that does business in your country. It's the only way to make it practical to protect your privacy in any meaningful way. That way, as soon as one person notices something wrong, they can get the state to assert their legal rights on behalf of everyone, and companies don't have the ability to carve out exceptions that look reasonable while actually violating your basic rights.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  2. Second sentence says it all... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and 48 percent wish 'more was being done about it.'

    Which can be loosely translated as "I hear people are concerned about this, so I guess *I* should be concerned about this, but it's not really worth my time or trouble to bother ACTUALLY doing something about"....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    1. Re:Second sentence says it all... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, it's almost like my life is finite and reading legalese isn't what I want to do with it. I want it outsourced to a third party. You know, like making sure my hot dog won't kill me. What's that called... government regulators.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Second sentence says it all... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I find the rank-and-file employees tend to be pretty competent. The incompetence comes from the top-down. Probably because of who gets elected and the promises they have to make.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:Second sentence says it all... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't trust people to act against their self-interest. The regulators at least don't have a direct profit motive.

      "I'm from the government, I'm here to help"

      I never understood this complaint. I mean, the government seems pretty helpful to me. Certainly, the times I hear about government help, usually the problem is that there is not enough (See, Puerto Rico.) Do you have examples of widespread problems?

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:Second sentence says it all... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The government is (at least in theory) accountable to the people. If the people don't like the actions of members of the government, those government officials can lose their jobs. Companies aren't accountable to people in general - only to those who pay them money. If your information is being sold by company A to companies B, C, D, and E, then you're not their customer - you're their product. They won't care if you don't like your information being sold because you have no say in what they do and likely don't have the legal muscle to stop them. (Especially if they're a big company like Equifax.) However, the government can stop them.

      This isn't to say that government regulations are always the solution. Just that they are a useful tool to give people power over companies that wouldn't otherwise be beholden to anyone.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  3. In other news by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People are concerned about corruption in politics, yet keep electing the same sumbitches.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:In other news by PPH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which one of those will help not elect the same sumbitches?

      We just did that. The Dems put up their candidate. Because it's her turn (needs of the party over those of the voters). The GOP tried the same thing, but got an outsider. In part as a FUCK YOU to the good ol' boy system. And look who got elected. Not because he was the best choice. But because enough of the voters didn't want more of the same shit.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  4. Or maybe... by Travelsonic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We shouldn't act like people are idiots for not reading something incredibly lengthy, wordy, and worded in such a way where they would not understand it, and instead point the finger, at least partially, at the people who insist on keeping these wordy EULAs without providing something that explains it in plain English?

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  5. Sherlock doesn't give a shit by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Consumers' Privacy Concerns Not Backed By Their Actions

    That's like saying, "Patriots' Concerns About The Constitution, The Rule of Law, Limited Government, and Ethical Leadership Not Backed By Their Voting Records".

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  6. I'm not worried about privacy by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm worried about healthcare, wages, retirement when I either can't work or nobody'll hire me. I'm worried about school for my kids, especially college.

    Surveillance is just a symptom of oppression. The root cause is always money. If you want to render it moot the solution is to make sure everybody (and I mean _everybody_, even lazy people and the ones you don't like) has access to food, shelter, healthcare, education & transportation (the latter being required to effectively access the former).

    Until we end the rat race we're going to be vulnerable. You're not free as long as somebody controls access to the things you need to live.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  7. What's the Implementation? by Voyager529 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Correlating whether or not one reads a EULA is not an effective metric.

    Take an app which allows texting from a web browser. Both will need to have a clause like "we collect your text messages and contacts", because that's genuinely necessary for the service to be performed. However, if it's followed up with "we don't sell to third parties" isn't helpful - it still allows them to give the data away, or sell access to the data, or give the data to a shell company who then does the selling. Even if none of these happen, such a clause allows for the first party firm to do their own data mining and sell the results in aggregate. Then, if they do any of the above, and *those* companies get hacked, you can be certain that even if the app developer doesn't have an arbitration clause, it would be almost impossible to take legal action against the other company.

    Location data is equally messy. The company with the most location data is Google itself, and unless you root, you're not stopping them from getting it with creepy accuracy even if the GPS is off. From there, apps requiring it are equally troubling. The EULA is a binary "use it or not". Most people would understandably let a navigation app use the GPS location in order to provide directions, but while Apple only allows apps to pull location data while an app is running, Android will happily let apps run a resident location scraper in the background without providing meaningful feedback to the end user.

    Finally, the real metric of whether people are willing to do something about their privacy starts small - paid apps with no-data-mining guarantees, and free apps where users pay with privacy. See what wins. ...but nobody wants to do that.

  8. Re:Read the terms and conditions everyone! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Terms and conditions are everywhere - not just in applications. Do you have a cell phone? You've agreed to your carrier's terms and conditions. Did you go to the movies? You've agreed to their terms and conditions. Did you attend a concert or sporting event? More terms and conditions. In fact, the terms and conditions for these likely make the ones for a phone app seem like plain, easily understood English.

    So people can't avoid terms and conditions unless they stay in their house all day and never venture outside.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.