Consumers Kinda, Sorta Care About Their Data (axios.com)

A full 81% of consumers say that in the past year they've become more concerned with how companies are using their data, and 87% say they've come to believe companies that manage personal data should be more regulated, according to a survey out Monday by IBM's Institute for Business Value. From a report: They aren't totally convinced they should care about how their data is being used, and many aren't taking meaningful action after privacy breaches, according to the survey. Despite increasing data risks, 71% say it's worth sacrificing privacy given the benefits of technology. [...] Despite increasing awareness of privacy and security breaches, most consumers aren't taking consequential action to protect their personal data. Fewer than half (45%) report that they've updated privacy settings, and only 16% stopped doing business with an entity due to data misuse.

Comments

Necessary evils

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Corporate behavior like this is the reason why we need personal injury lawyers. Unsafe products were sold rampantly. No unsafe services are being "sold" rampantly. A few people suffering losses, some shyster getting a multi million dollar award, might eventually bring about some changes... may be... in 20 years...

I don't care

[rsilvergun]

Data privacy is so far down the list of problems in my life it barely registers.

Maybe it's different in Europe & Canada, but in the US we aren't guaranteed healthcare (and I have friends who struggle daily to get the medicine they need to live), inflation's about 4.5% on necessities (food, healthcare, rent, insurance, tuition, etc) but pay raises top out around 3% if you're very, very lucky, my government's actively involved in 8 wars, working on 9 and 10 and using the debt from those wars as an excuse for why they can't pay for us all to have healthcare. Oh, and my taxes just went up this year.

The rich and powerful have much, much better ways to oppress me than invading my privacy. Any talk of it is just a side show from much, much bigger problems.

Re:I don't care

[Anonymous Coward]

Not quite.

The excuse for why you can't have decent healthcare is "socialism" and "this one person in Canada had to wait 6 months to get a knee replacement once" type stories. I'd rather be bankrupted than risk having my knee replacement delayed.

The debt from the wars is being used as an excuse for why they will have to take away your social security and Medicare. Don't worry, though, they'll give you a voucher! Capitalism will fix it all!

And while we don't believe in climate change, all these freak storms are bankrupting FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program, so we'll be gutting both of those programs soon as well. I have an idea. Let's privatize them.

Time to pull on those bootstraps a little harder

Re:I don't care

[Opportunist]

You should vote a party in that ends those wars and gets more social equality going in your country!

Oh. Wait. You can't.

Re: I don't care

[Anonymous Coward]

Data privacy is even more important to you, you just don't realize it.

When these companies, health insurance companies included, use the data to service only those in the mainstream.

For instance, I have a disorder that when I take the medication that's normally prescribed I end up in the hospital immediately and nearly die because my body can't tolerate the medication. I've done this on two occasions for this type of treatment. My doctor (correctly) won't prescribe that type of medication anymore to me and I wouldn't take it anyway. He then prescribed something else that I tried on samples which worked.

My insurance company has analyzed the medical dara, analyzed the trends in healthcare, blah blah blah, and has determined that normally people should try 3 different types of that particular drug before moving on to the secondary treatment and has decided not to cover that for me.

$500 per pill, twice daily. I go without since I'm not a billionaire and will die 10 years younger because my insurance company is playing backseat doctor.

Re: I don't care

[ThosLives]

$1000 a day for medication isn't an insurance problem, it's an FDA and/or USPTO problem.

Re:I don't care

[Anonymous Coward]

Data privacy is so far down the list of problems in my life it barely registers.

You should worry, companies can pre-screen you when looking for a job without your knowledge. AKA make your ability to support yourself. Companies are building a caste like society where you will be pre-excluded without your knowledge based on your "risk profile". AKA you'll be denied opportunities and won't be aware of it and you might think your inability to get a job is your fault when you're being discriminated against.

We should all worry about discrimination especially when the rules are bent so far in the employers direction, most people have to work afford food and a roof over their heads. Having people being actively discriminated against without their knowledge is a bad idea.

Re: I don't care

[BringsApples]

There's no way that pill costs $500 to manufacture. The problem is that capitalism shouldn't be able to creep into life-support systems.

Re: I don't care

[CrimsonAvenger]

There's no way that pill costs $500 to manufacture.

No, but it probably cost billions to develop, what with the actual development of a new drug, plus clinical trials, FDA approval, lawsuits, etc. And unless the drug affects a LOT of people, they'll never sell enough to recover development costs if they sell it for cost to manufacture plus small profit margin.

Do remember that a drug company will, in general, try to produce 10+ new drugs for every one that makes it to market. And in addition to the colossal costs a new drug incurs, it has to carry the 9+ other drugs that didn't make it out of widespread testing....

And no, it wouldn't be improved much if the whole business were done by the government. Because the money has got to come from somewhere, even when it's the government spending it....

Re: I don't care

[BringsApples]

I thought that all of the pharmaceutical companies that sold life-saving drugs were bought out, had their development departments all but removed, and moved to focus on raising the price(s) of said drug(s) by thousands of percents.

Re:I don't care

[Kyr Arvin]

Not quite.

The excuse for why you can't have decent healthcare is "socialism" and "this one person in Canada had to wait 6 months to get a knee replacement once" type stories.

In the United States, we love to shout that we're #1 in everything, even when it's not true. The attitude of being "the best" is absolutely, strongly enforced, especially on the conservative side (both sides will do this to a certain extent, but if you're not in favor of change, then you have to think that things are great enough to not change them).

We'll see it both blatantly and subtly. "We have the best health care, everyone wants to travel here for surgery." "Why should we listen to Country X's ideas on how better to handle things? They're not as big and powerful as we are, so clearly we're doing things the right way."

We love to tell bizarre horror stories about rationing, lines, and whatnot in Canada's medical system and the UK's, despite those countries have far better health care systems in almost every available measurement. We'll take a rare edge case and pretend that it's the norm, then attack that as a reason not to change our broken system.

Re: I don't care

[pnutjam]

It's all part of the problem. Insurance companies make a percentage of what they take in in, so higher prices mean higher premiums. Their incentives are all wrong, but there really isn't a right way to do it that involves profit.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[lionchild]

Part of the issue is that there are some entities, we're not actually doing business with, like the Credit Bureau, whom we can't stop giving them our data. Even if we stop using credit cards, they still collect data from bills we pay by check or with cash, because our sewer, electric, gas, etc... reports our on-time payments to them.

Recent reports show that even when they don't want it, app makers are reporting data to Facebook, and Facebook is having to report they're getting personal data they don't want, including medical and finical-related data. It's easy to see that people are disillusioned with the idea they can protect themselves altogether. And if they can't do that, why not have the benefits of the services, at least, if they're going to have your data anyway?

Re:Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[DogDude]

Recent reports show that even when they don't want it, app makers are reporting data to Facebook

There's a really simple solution to this, you know. Try reading your own sentence again and see if you can figure it out.

Usual answers. Consequences? Ok, but for others.

[Opportunist]

Should others do (insert random thing)? Yeah, sure! Me likey very much!

Are you going to do (insert same thing)? Well, no, not really, it ain't that important...

All this answer does is tell me people do NOT care about their privacy.

Sure I can

[rsilvergun]

The left wing of the Democratic party (Berniecrats? Justice Democrats? Call 'em what you like) will do it, and they've been gaining ground since 2015. Trump has, if anything, been a huge boost to them. It showed loud and clear that the old school, Clintonian / Establishment Democrats are a dead end.

The only question right now is will the old money folks manage to crush the left wing. I honestly don't know. It depends on the Millennials. If they show up to vote we win. If they stay home we lose and everything the boomers said about them is proven true. Time will tell.

Re:Sure I can

[teg]

The left wing of the Democratic party (Berniecrats? Justice Democrats? Call 'em what you like) will do it, and they've been gaining ground since 2015. Trump has, if anything, been a huge boost to them. It showed loud and clear that the old school, Clintonian / Establishment Democrats are a dead end. The only question right now is will the old money folks manage to crush the left wing. I honestly don't know. It depends on the Millennials. If they show up to vote we win. If they stay home we lose and everything the boomers said about them is proven true. Time will tell.

The bad part is, if the loonie left gets to select a candidate chances are Drumpf would win. 3% wealth tax and 70% income tax might be just what he needs to win. I'm not an American (I have worked there a couple of years), and I can't fathom how he managed to get elected. However, while almost everything of what he and his voters stand appal me if the opposition said "3% wealth tax, 70% income tax" I might just have voted for him if I had to select one of them.

That one side goes insane doesn't mean the other side has to go extremist as well.

Re:Sure I can

[ShanghaiBill]

The faster left, or the farther right, you go the more likely you are to see the U,S, military involved in foreign wars.

This is not supported by evidence. The 2003 Iraq War was one of our dumbest wars, and it was supported overwhelmingly by centrists. It was the left (including Bernie) and the "paleo-conservatives" on the right (including Pat Buchanan), who opposed it.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, that was the legal basis for the Vietnam War, was also supported by centrists.

Re:MEANWHILE...

[Cowardly Lurker]

Woah, calm down bud! BTW I think your Jinping is showing through all that nonsense.

Re:They don't fully understand

[Anonymous Coward]

And thank the nation-state for having your flesh serialized with a number. I am sure congress, can, this time, be entrusted to protect my interest.
DMCA
Never ending copyrights
Snowden
TIA
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."

That's a "Both Sides are Bad" argument

[rsilvergun]

milktoast centrism is what got us Hilary Clinton and in turn Donal Trump. The actual left, as a matter of policy, opposes US military intervention policies.

As for North Korea, it depends on what Kim wants. Trump has already shown with Syria that he's laughably bad at negotiations. There's a story of him "negotiating" with Ed McMahon and, after talking for a few hours walking out with nothing and Ed getting everything. A guy like Kim, who has managed to survive his father's death, is going to run rings around Trump. Just like Putin did.

Re:Almost nobody cares

[Actually, I do RTFA]

You don't care about the data you use with those services. For instance, you left out LinkedIn. That's because LinkedIn is primarily used to post your resume, build a professional network, and write blog posts about how important you are. All that data is explicitly opted into.

Re:Almost nobody cares

[DogDude]

Well, except I didn't... Linkedin is Facebook (as is Instagram, etc).

Half Care, Half Don't

[foxalopex]

I'm pretty careful on managing my own massive collection of Video data on my own NAS systems (Anime, personal photos, media) and various other things and I'm pretty sure I would be upset if someone got a hold of that system even if there isn't anything really incriminating on there aside from the fact that I have pirate copies of media like almost everyone else. Personal information that I give out to say register for a google account is something I'm not too upset about google having and is what I consider fair trade for the "free" services they provide.

Personal info is a product

[WolfgangVL]

This product is bought, sold, and traded. It is shared as payment for "freemium" services (at steeply discounted price of *0*) It has real monetary value.

Stop giving it away. Stop using those services, and send them each a certified letter terminating any agreements. There ARE alternatives for each and every freemium service.

Draft your own license agreement, decide what your own data is worth, define how this license is terminated in the event of a data breach and send it along with your termination letter.

Contract with the copyright settlement extortionists next, and put them to work.

Spin up the lawyers for a data breach. Losing exclusive rights to your data in a public breach is a loss right? That's standing? Keep it small claims only. No army of corporate lawyers allowed.

I'm no lawyer, but I feel like IP law has been strengthened so much over the past 20 years that this might actually work.

Re:Almost nobody cares

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Huh? Are you saying LinkedIn is stupid because it's social so you don't use it? Or do are you saying that LinkedIn doesn't just opt in data? Or what?

Are are you confused and think that FB owns LinkedIn. They Don't. Microsoft does.

I don't care about my data

[hymie]

I don't care about my data. I don't care if my phone knows where I've been and tells anyone who asks. I don't care if I search for a product and then see ads for it. I don't care who sees my posts on Facebook. I don't care what cookies are in my browser. I don't care what my Google Home device and Smart TVs see and hear. I don't use ad blockers. I don't have Javascript disabled. If a whole ecosystem of cyberbusinesses wants to swirl around me trying to figure out what I want so they can sell me stuff or grab my attention, good for them.

I am extremely glad for all the stuff I get for free from the internet. And it is free - just because my data is valuable in the aggregate to other people doesn't mean it's valuable to me, and I don't care that companies are getting that data and trying to use it for profit.

The only thing I get from privacy nerds is annoyed - stupid click-away notices about cookies on websites, moronic privacy policies, and idiotic pages and pages of HIPAA notices every time I see a new doctor. They have inserted valueless friction into systems that should operate smoothly and seamlessly.

Marked as duplicate

[ayesnymous]

https://yro.slashdot.org/story...