• maynarkh
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Yeah, I understand and I actually agree. The GDPR is not doing enough, yet it’s the best effort we have made. I usually see criticism from the other side, eg. “regulation bad”.

    If it were up to me, I’d just say that the surveillance capitalism industry should be outlawed completely, treated the same as slave and arms trading. It’s actively making the world worse for most people.

    • General_Effort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      surveillance capitalism industry should be outlawed completely

      Can I ask what you hope to achieve with that?

      It would fail to address many of the problems I see with the whole industry. EG you could still do AB testing because that’s not surveillance. At the same time, it would have negative consequences. That data can be used for good or evil. I think the potential for good is greater, even as it stands now.

      • maynarkh
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It is already being used for evil. I just don’t see a reality where you can trust the government or companies with data like that. I would love if that reality existed though.

        Thinking about it, I would say that for answering “does this demographic at large like or need this” shaped questions can be answered by using relatively small samples without identifying every single individual in the group. If you want to help a group, that’s enough, since people in the group really want your thing to happen, they will come forward. If you want to do something to everyone in the group against their will, that becomes harder.

        I think I just value being able to hide my affiliations to certain groups, I want to be able to get out of my bubble and not have a label everywhere I go.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          If you want to help a group, that’s enough, since people in the group really want your thing to happen, they will come forward.

          That’s the thing. The information will still be there to abuse. To develop my earlier example: Say you want to offer kosher foodstuffs. If you can’t “target” your potential customers with google ads, you have to use facebook groups, reddit subs, maybe certain websites and the like. Most ads would be mainstream stuff targeted to the majority population (especially the part with the disposable income). Minorities would be excluded in a sense.

          The mainstream would not be affected but it would become harder for companies to cater to minority interests. Not just ethnic minorities but also people with niche interests. Minorities without existing organization (like the mentioned groups, subs, …) would be impossible to reach (maybe recent immigrants). It would be harder to serve such minority communities, commercially or not. As organizations catering to minorities are typically owned and run by members of these minorities, they would take the hit on both ends.

          You can probably guess why I chose kosher foodstuffs as an example. Nazi Germany could have used the same information to hunt down Jews. So definitely potential for good and evil here. Nazi Germany managed without the internet. Unless a group functions on a clandestine cell system, the information has to be somewhere. I can’t imagine a scenario, where an evil government couldn’t get to that information relatively easily. So, I believe the damage to the community would outweigh the small gain in safety.

          One also has to think of people who don’t know that they are part of a group. An idea I have is that it should be possible to diagnose some conditions or diseases from internet activity; EG ADHD or Parkinson. It’s creepy to think that one could be surveilled for that purpose but I think it would be social good to do something with that.

          I think I just value being able to hide my affiliations to certain groups, I want to be able to get out of my bubble and not have a label everywhere I go.

          Same here. Plus (for me) it’s just a bad feeling when you are watched. But I don’t think it’s rational or healthy. I don’t think we should give power to these feelings. It’s like the fear of public speaking. Many (most?) people have it and it’s rarely a problem to give in. But when you start structuring your life around avoiding something, you have a problem.

          Look to LGBTQ. The power move is coming out. That still can have negative consequences in many places. It certainly received hostile reactions anywhere, even in the west, less than 50 years ago. Hiding was rational. Coming out was a sacrifice that took great courage. It still is so for many. Openness was the way to more freedom, not better secrecy. I’m sure that LGBTQ people who live openly, where they can, are living better, healthier lives; through less privacy rather than more.

          What am I worried about in comparison? What if all the porn videos I ever watched were made public? The idea is probably terrifying to just about anyone. But who has really any reason to fear anything?

          I’m not saying we shouldn’t have data protection regulation. Some data, like payment data, will be abused if leaked. Some data may be abused by extremists. And even where there is no rational reason to worry, privacy is still a natural human need. I want my bathroom stall to have a door like anyone else. But if I have to go in the open it’s no big deal. I don’t want my porn preferences public, either. It’s just that I don’t think that aspect of surveillance capitalism deserves more than a passing consideration.