Hello Everyone,
We have been exposed to privacy related issues over the recent years, ever since the Snowden revelation. While we generally know how data/metadata can be used to build a social graph, suggest us ads based on what we searched or talked about. I would like to know how it is actually done?
In case of services that can access user’s data/metadata like Facebook, Google and E2EE services where only metadata is accessible (in varying amounts) (assuming E2EE is implemented properly so only data is accessible). And, we also have I have nothing to hide or I don’t care if they use my data to suggest ads people. How do we make them understand the real implications of privacy & security and how breach of that data/metadata can impact them now or in the future.
Any resources to read more on these issues would be much appreciated. I’m gathering & reading up on resources from my own search through blogs & other social media platforms. Would like to know the views of lemmy community members here.
This site is a pretty good read if you have a chance https://write.privacytools.io/, they also have another website privacytools.io . recommend checking it out
Thanks, I’ll have a look at this.
What I usually say apart from the typical valid arguments is that most laws about privacy are from well before the Internet even existed, so they can’t be directly used. Companies know that, and there finally is some kind of legal response in Europe against Google and Facebook, which I hope will lead to more people being curious about this. If this is non issue, then why does the EU give a damn about it?
I get that argument, so only if the Governments are concerned about this and take action against these entities, will more people become curious?
I believe it can at least give a sense of credibility to the whole privacy issue. It kinds of invalidates the “tinfoil hats” argument when there are active legal cases ongoing. It’s not about a few individuals, it’s literally a new currency of people’s data.
No matter how well you encrypt email, the technical sender and recipient will always be unencrypted, as otherwise the messages could not be delivered. So servers. isps, and surveillance programs will log who is talking to who and what servers are being used.
Similarly, facebook delivers ‘encrypted’ messages but still knows who, where and when the users are. This is the ‘meta’ information. Like how the postal service can read the sender, receiving address and stamped date.
Some practical examples: -Drug dealer gets busted using E2E on facebook, at very least the authorities will know who is messaging them and when, opening them to an investigation, whether or not they had anything to do with drugs. -Local activist is surveilled, authorities can trace their contacts and active periods.
How would that metadata affect average users? those who use it for work, talking to friends and family. Why should they be worried about it?
The metadata is actually a powerful tool to make a lot of accurate guesses about someone. I suggest you check out the documentary Nothing to hide, available on Peertube.
People get affected just because they are in contact with activists for example. Friends of a person of interest can be pressured or tricked into giving info about them for example.
And if you’re worried about surveillance capitalism, you location, the businesses you contact, the purchases you make are all super useful to build an advertising profile of you.
And if you’re worried about surveillance capitalism, you location, the businesses you contact, the purchases you make are all super useful to build an advertising profile of you.
This one!
I have people I know from family to friends, ask me “So what? I get ton of ads and phone calls, this is another one, I don’t mind anymore.” My justifications end up either being lame or doesn’t cause any immediate concern, which leads to, ok I’ll check it out, just like an interviewer that says, “We’ll get back to you”, to which we certainly know the meaning for.
I’m trying find some concrete examples & real life incidents, that would help people understand the importance of privacy. Cambridge Analytica is one thing that I have recommended/discussed that with friends I know.
Cambridge Analytica is a good example, but overall the fact that ad based social networks highly benefit from controversies becoming more popular and people screaming at each other has lead them to actively worsen public discussions. If social networks had been designed to push people to be friendlier, we would likely be in a better situation today regarding conspiracies and Donald Trump would probably never have been elected.
So, basically they make money by polarizing/already polarized people?
They make money by getting people to click on ads. So they want to increase the numbers of ads that are clicked while decreasing the number of ads that are shown. To do so, they build a psychological profile of the users of the platform. In order to have the best profiles, they need to push people to interact with the content they see, so they promote content that causes a lot of interaction.
It is widely known that content that appeal to emotions like rage and anger get a ton of interaction. The social networks know that, and ideally, they should take steps to promote nicer content, but they don’t, because it would hurt their income.
Sadly, that is a bit like people in an abusive relationship. There is very little you as an outsider can say that would make them change the situation.
What you can do is make them aware of better alternatives by being a living example.
