Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 464

Thread: More German Anti-Tech Lunacy

  1. #1
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,152

    Default More German Anti-Tech Lunacy

    Beyond basically making Google Analytics illegal, Germany has recently gone after Facebook for having facial recognition software (as if they are the first to employ this technology) and Samsung for selling Galaxy tablets while patent disputes are outstanding.

    Granted, Apple may win a similar same distribution fight in the US. But the speed and vehemence with which German courts and "data protection" lunatics manage to stop new technologies is pretty stunning.

  2. #2
    Australia banned the tablet first Injunctions happen everywhere, even the US (especially with tech companies), do we really need examples for that?


    Facebook's problem is not the use of the tech, its how they are using it. Same for Google. German's don't like the idea of their internet usage being tracked and farmed without consent or control; and good for them.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  3. #3
    That's no moon. EyeKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Facebook's problem is not the use of the tech, its how they are using it. Same for Google. German's don't like the idea of their internet usage being tracked and farmed without consent or control; and good for them.
    Here here.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  4. #4
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,152
    That's an awfully low standard for defining "tracked and farmed". The placement of an analytics cookie is hardly a major intrusion.

    And what is so objectionable with having a service allow you to group-tag friends by recognizing who has a similar face?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    That's an awfully low standard for defining "tracked and farmed". The placement of an analytics cookie is hardly a major intrusion.
    Those cookies are then harvested on servers that are outside the control of the german government. Remember the thread that showed how a cookie fingerprint can be used to track who you are and where you go, without using actual tracking cookies?

    And what is so objectionable with having a service allow you to group-tag friends by recognizing who has a similar face?
    Its likely the idea that its a default service, and as usual with facebook design hard to turn off, and impossible to remove pictures completely.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  6. #6
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,152
    Define "who you are" based on a cookie.

    It seems pretty clear the German objection is to the underlying product itself. And it goes harks to this bizarre idea that people can't upload pictures they take of you to a photo site. That's the German idea of "privacy" and it's retrograde to the point of being luddite.

    And, without crazy laws that make photographs of your face taken in public your property, what pictures can be removed from any service?

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    Define "who you are" based on a cookie.
    Remember that thread that showed how your computer has a unique print based on what type of fonts are installed, what browser and extentions are used, your screen resolution, all the crazy shit no one thinks twice about? You can mine that type of information and track how it moves across your network, literally tracking a user as they move from site to site. With enough tracking you can end up with enough information to pinpoint a real person at a physical location. Researchers did it a few years ago using only an insanely small fraction of AOL searches, and AOL got its assed sued over it, in the US.

    Only thing clear here is the absence of knowledge for how data mining works and how valuable and personal it can get.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    what pictures can be removed from any service?
    There are services all over the web that allow the user far more control over their uploads than what facebook allows. If I'm not mistaken Google+ gives a full delete option and the Reddit guy who owns imgur claims that once an upload delete link is used the image is purged.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 08-10-2011 at 05:11 AM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  8. #8
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Facebook's problem is not the use of the tech, its how they are using it. Same for Google. German's don't like the idea of their internet usage being tracked and farmed without consent or control; and good for them.
    Instead of suing companies with data usage policies you disagree with, how about choosing to not use their services? Don't like Facebook's photo tagging, don't have a Facebook account (which is a good idea anyway). Don't like Google's analytic cookies, don't use Google... or use the "Incognito mode" in Google's browser [Chrome].

    But nah, it's better to prevent anyone in the entire country from using these products than allow them to exercise freedom of choice.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  9. #9
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,152
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Remember that thread that showed how your computer has a unique print based on what type of fonts are installed, what browser and extentions are used, your screen resolution, all the crazy shit no one thinks twice about? You can mine that type of information and track how it moves across your network, literally tracking a user as they move from site to site. With enough tracking you can end up with enough information to pinpoint a real person at a physical location. Researchers did it a few years ago using only an insanely small fraction of AOL searches, and AOL got its assed sued over it, in the US.

    Only thing clear here is the absence of knowledge for how data mining works and how valuable and personal it can get.
    The lawsuit you're referring to had nothing to do with cookies, it had to do with AOL releasing an archive of searches for individuals grouped by individuals. Those searches obviously contained plenty of personal information. But we're talking about cookies, not search histories.

    At the end of the day, the best data analysis is always little more than an approximation and always still anonymized. And the free services we get from nominally targeted ads is definitely well worth it.

    There are services all over the web that allow the user far more control over their uploads than what facebook allows. If I'm not mistaken Google+ gives a full delete option and the Reddit guy who owns imgur claims that once an upload delete link is used the image is purged.
    So the solution is to ban Facebook photo uploads?

  10. #10
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,152
    I was focusing on Germany when my beef has been more EU-wide, but maybe it's not just Germany. Europe's luddite instincts are becoming a real freedom of speech issue.

    August 9, 2011
    On Its Own, Europe Backs Web Privacy Fights
    By SUZANNE DALEY
    MADRID — All 90 people wanted information deleted from the Web.

    Among them was a victim of domestic violence who discovered that her address could easily be found through Google. Another, well into middle age now, thought it was unfair that a few computer key strokes could unearth an account of her arrest in her college days.

    They might not have received much of a hearing in the United States, where Google is based. But here, as elsewhere in Europe, an idea has taken hold —individuals should have a “right to be forgotten” on the Web.

    Spain’s government is now championing this cause. It has ordered Google to stop indexing information about 90 citizens who filed formal complaints with its Data Protection Agency. The case is now in court and being watched closely across Europe for how it might affect the control citizens will have over information they posted, or which was posted about them, on the Web.

    Whatever the ruling in the Spanish case, the European Union is also expected to weigh in with new “right to be forgotten” regulations this fall. Viviane Reding, the European Union’s justice commissioner, has offered few details of what she has in mind. But she has made clear she is determined to give privacy watchdogs greater power.

    “I cannot accept that individuals have no say over their data once it has been launched into cyberspace,” she said last month. She said she had heard the argument that more control was impossible, and that Europeans should “get over it.”

    But, Ms. Reding said, “I don’t agree.”

    On this issue, experts say, Europe and the United States have largely parted company.

    “What you really have here is a trans-Atlantic clash,” said Franz Werro, who was born and raised in Switzerland and is now a law professor at Georgetown University. “The two cultures really aren’t going in the same direction when it comes to privacy rights. “

    For instance, in the United States, Mr. Werro said, courts have consistently found that the right to publish the truth about someone’s past supersedes any right to privacy. Europeans, he said, see things differently: “In Europe you don’t have the right to say anything about anybody, even if it is true.”

    Mr. Werro says Europe sees the need to balance freedom of speech and the right to know against a person’s right to privacy or dignity, concepts often enshrined in European laws. The European perspective was shaped by the way information was collected and used against individuals under dictators like Franco and Hitler and under Communism. Government agencies routinely compiled dossiers on citizens as a means of control.

    Court cases over these issues have popped up in many corners of Europe.

    In Germany, for instance, Wolfgang Werlé and Manfred Lauber, who became infamous for killing a German actor in 1990, are suing Wikipedia to drop the entry about them. German privacy laws allow suppression of criminal identities in news accounts once people have paid their debt to society. The lawyer for the two killers argues that criminals have a right to privacy too, and a right to be left alone.

    Google has also faced suits in several countries, including Germany, Switzerland and the Czech Republic, over its efforts to collect street-by-street photographs for its Street View feature. In Germany, where courts found that Street View was legal, Google allowed individuals and businesses to opt out, and about 250,000 have.

    The issue, however, has had no traction in the United States, where anyone has the right to take pictures of anything in plain sight from the street.

    Google declined to discuss the Spanish cases, instead issuing a statement saying that requiring search engines to ignore some data “would have a profound chilling effect on free expression without protecting people’s privacy.”

    In a blog post this year, Peter Fleischer, Google’s global privacy counsel, discussed the subject under the headline, “Foggy thinking about the Right to Oblivion.” The blog post made clear that he was speaking for himself, not Google. But he left little doubt that he considered Europe’s efforts to forge new privacy rights poorly defined and misguided, raising complex legal and technical questions.

    In fact, the phrase “right to be forgotten” is being used to cover a batch of issues, ranging from those in the Spanish case to the behavior of companies seeking to make money from private information that can be collected on the Web.

    Some European experts feel that new rules of play need to be drawn up anyway.

    Mr. Werro says many Europeans, including himself, are broadly uncomfortable with the way personal information is found by search engines and used for commerce. When ads pop up on his screen, clearly linked to subjects that are of interest to him, he says he finds it Orwellian.

    A recent poll conducted by the European Union found that most Europeans agree. Three out of four said they were worried about how Internet companies used their information and wanted the right to delete personal data at any time. Ninety percent wanted the European Union to take action on the right to be forgotten.

    Spain’s Data Protection Agency, created in the 1990s to protect individual rights, believes that search engines have altered the process by which most data ends up forgotten — and therefore adjustments need to be made.

    The deputy director of the agency, Jesús Rubí, pointed to the official government gazette, which used to publish every weekday, including bankruptcy auctions, official pardons, and who passed the civil service exams. Usually 220 pages of fine print, it quickly ended up gathering dust on various backroom shelves. The information was still there, but not easily accessible.

    Then two years ago, the 350-year-old publication went online, making it possible for embarrassing information — no matter how old — to be obtained easily.

    Mr. Rubí said he doubted that anyone meant for the information to haunt citizens forever: “The law obliges us to put this info in the gazette. But I am sure that if the law was written today, lawmakers would say O.K., publish this, but it should not be accessible by a search engine.”

    The publisher of the government publication, Fernando Pérez, said it was meant to foster transparency. Lists of scholarship winners, for instance, make it hard for the government officials to steer all the money to their own children. “But maybe,” he said, “there is information that has a life cycle and only has value for a certain time.”

    Experts say that Google and other search engines see some of these court cases as an assault on a principle of law already established — that search engines are essentially not responsible for the information they corral from the Web, and hope the Spanish court agrees. The companies believe if there are privacy issues, the complainants should address those who posted the material on the Web.

    But some experts in Europe believe that search engines should probably be reined in. “They say they are not publishing, so you should address yourself elsewhere,” said Javier de la Cueva, a Madrid lawyer specializing in the relationship between law and technology. “But they are the ones that are spreading the word. Without them no one would find these things.”

    Rachel Chaundler contributed reporting.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/10/wo...e/10spain.html

  11. #11
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    I was focusing on Germany when my beef has been more EU-wide, but maybe it's not just Germany. Europe's luddite instincts are becoming a real freedom of speech issue.
    Worse than that, they're insisting upon a violation of the laws of physics - information cannot be destroyed.

    Frankly, every time I see this issue come up (US, EU, wherever), it makes me wonder what the fuck is wrong with everyone. Being embarrassed over the same dirty laundry and past mistakes everyone has, and/or judging other people for the very same things they've done themselves.

    I think it makes a strong case for the "light a match and watch the world burn" approach to dealing with others, but whatever... not like there's enough accelerant lying around to make that plan work anyway... at least, not yet.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  12. #12
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,304
    Oh, I'm sorry, Dread. Are strong Privacy rules now luddite? You moron. Look up the definition for luddite first, you idiot. Are you jerking off again on the idea that once again you can educate us lowly Europeans on how wrong our ways are? Can someone please now strip you of your modhat and show you for the troll you are?

    And of course information can be destroyed. Never heard of entropy, huh? Please educate yourself on physics before you make such moronic statements. Didn't you also defend your right to privacy in another thread? Oh, well, chalk one up for idiotic inconsistency.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    Instead of suing companies with data usage policies you disagree with, how about choosing to not use their services? Don't like Facebook's photo tagging, don't have a Facebook account (which is a good idea anyway). Don't like Google's analytic cookies, don't use Google... or use the "Incognito mode" in Google's browser [Chrome].
    Some countries understand that some businesses and tactics are to widespread and monopolistic to use the simple minded "you can always not use them" idea. Facebook is almost required for background checks, networking, and most businesses. Google analytics come into play with google adsense, which is nearly impossible to avoid because you don't know before hand which sites do and don't use their service.

    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    makes me wonder what the fuck is wrong with everyone. Being embarrassed over the same dirty laundry and past mistakes everyone has, and/or judging other people for the very same things they've done themselves.
    Can someone please crosspost this over to the Florida transparency thread please?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    The lawsuit you're referring to had nothing to do with cookies, it had to do with AOL releasing an archive of searches for individuals grouped by individuals. Those searches obviously contained plenty of personal information. But we're talking about cookies, not search histories.
    They contained only a fraction of how someone used their internet access (and yet it was still possible to pin point 1 data point out of 7 billion), and every search they conducted, if done through google (or any site tied to a google service), would have provided the same information and more.

    At the end of the day, the best data analysis is always little more than an approximation and always still anonymized. And the free services we get from nominally targeted ads is definitely well worth it.
    Then you obvious disagree with the German government for how anonymized and approximate it is. The worth of services now compared to what was offered, say 5 - 10 years which far less data, is of course your own opinion.

    So the solution is to ban Facebook photo uploads?
    Yep, complete comprehension fail here. No one has banned facebook's ability to upload photos (at least in anything you've linked to). Because, again, its not the service thats the problem, its how its being used.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 08-10-2011 at 05:24 PM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  14. #14
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    And of course information can be destroyed. Never heard of entropy, huh? Please educate yourself on physics before you make such moronic statements.
    "Conservation of quantum information"

    Until you learn how to use a search engine, and/or the most basic concepts in play, stop injecting your jackassery everywhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    Didn't you also defend your right to privacy in another thread? Oh, well, chalk one up for idiotic inconsistency.
    So I'm allowed to opt of of using the police, just like I don't have a Facebook account? Chalk up another one for Khen being a combative jackass, like always, who has no idea what he's talking about, as usual.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Some countries understand that some businesses and tactics are to widespread and monopolistic to use the simple minded "you can always not use them" idea. Facebook is almost required for background checks, networking, and most businesses.
    A bit early in the morning to be stoned, innit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Can someone please crosspost this over to the Florida transparency thread please?
    Can you tell the difference between a choice and compulsion? No? Well, too bad, because that's the difference.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  15. #15
    Absolutely Sane Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pancakeistan
    Posts
    2,493
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    A bit early in the morning to be stoned, innit?
    *Witty sarcastic remark about timezones and Americans being so daft they think there's only 2 hours of the stuff to go around*

    I wish I was witty, or wise in the ways of sarcasm

    edit: Ah, you switched to OG. Well, that's my face red. Expect witty sarcastic remark about Europeans being to daft to read.
    Last edited by Ziggy Stardust; 08-10-2011 at 03:34 PM.
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  16. #16
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423


    Nah, I'd never accuse Khen of being stoned. I can't even imagine it, given the effect cannabinoids have on aggression. Really, can you envision Khen stoned? All passive and non-combative and... <gasp> agreeable... maybe even pleasant?
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  17. #17
    ======== Timbuk2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,804
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    Really, can you envision Khen stoned? All passive and non-combative and... <gasp> agreeable... maybe even pleasant?
    From just the one post in this thread ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    You moron.
    you idiot.
    you jerking off again
    troll you are
    you make such moronic statements
    idiotic .


    Seems pleasant enough.
    Last edited by Timbuk2; 08-10-2011 at 05:03 PM.

  18. #18
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Timbuk2 View Post


    Seems pleasant enough.


    I'm glad we don't have to moderate our conversations to a G level for kiddies but that's amusing.

  19. #19
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,455
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Google analytics come into play with google adsense, which is nearly impossible to avoid because you don't know before hand which sites do and don't use their service.
    You could, I dunno, use something that blocks scripts from running. Wild idea, I know.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    A bit early in the morning to be stoned, innit?

    Can you tell the difference between a choice and compulsion? No? Well, too bad, because that's the difference.
    Its pretty hard trying to follow whatever point you are attempting to make when your replies are empty of context and use only insults, but I'll try anyway...

    There is a very valid and growing concern that to few companies control to much of the activity on the internet, and that those companies now treat what used to be customers as a product instead. Yes there are programs, scripts, add-ons that users can use, install, and run in order to add a layer of personal protection and privacy, but the point behinds these laws are that people shouldn't have to do that, and most people aren't at a computer competency level in order to make these counter-measures work properly. Look at your Tor/FF bundle how badly it breaks on modern websites.

    Also not seeing the choice and compulsion angle. Someone has just as much luck and choice in avoiding an arrest with or without conviction (for whatever reason) as they of avoiding being caught in a picture by someone who happens to know who they are.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  21. #21
    Senior Member Enoch the Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    There is a very valid and growing concern that to few companies control to much of the activity on the internet, and that those companies now treat what used to be customers as a product instead. Yes there are programs, scripts, add-ons that users can use, install, and run in order to add a layer of personal protection and privacy, but the point behinds these laws are that people shouldn't have to do that, and most people aren't at a computer competency level in order to make these counter-measures work properly. Look at your Tor/FF bundle how badly it breaks on modern websites.
    I don't recall the last time I received an invoice from Google or Facebook, nor have I been coerced into using them.

  22. #22
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Stop being so unreasonable, Fuzzy. There's just no way people can be expected to be responsible for their privacy online, while there are no free, easy to use solutions to avoid tracking, especially considering we're all forced to put every detail of our lives on Facebook.

    Click to view the full version
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    I don't recall the last time I received an invoice from Google or Facebook.
    Sucks don't it. Even Wraith was entertaining the idea at one point

    , nor have I been coerced into using them
    and such an experience has yet to be claimed. however it would be damn near impossible to use the internet (much less post here) without coming across the network that either one of these internet giants have setup, without relying on 3rd party programs. The net has a big enough problem where only fools get taken advantage of, tracking and harvesting of personal information from networks like google and facebook shouldn't get a pass on that as well.

    EDIT:
    Wraith, you kill the adsense banners?
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  24. #24
    Unencrypted Wraith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Sucks don't it. Even Wraith was entertaining the idea at one point
    What?

    Wraith, you kill the adsense banners?
    Only for logged in users. Mostly because it became obvious that it'd take most of you over three months to realize they were gone.

  25. #25
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Its pretty hard trying to follow whatever point you are attempting to make when your replies are empty of context and use only insults, but I'll try anyway...
    My apologies. I clearly erred in giving you the benefit of the doubt. I assumed that severe intoxication resulting from smoking marijuana was that the only reason you made a laughable assertion like:

    Some countries understand that some businesses and tactics are to widespread and monopolistic to use the simple minded "you can always not use them" idea. Facebook is almost required for background checks, networking, and most businesses.

    I don't use Facebook, and I generally opt out of Google analytics. Not using Facebook is as easy as... not wasting my time uploading my personal life to the internet (and then bitching that my private life can be found on the internet), and not being tracked by Google is as simple as any of:

    Blocking scripts from analytics.google.com
    Blocking tracking cookies
    Using a VPN or proxy
    Using the private/incognito/"disposable session" browsing modes in my browser(s)
    And other techniques that actually require some modicum of skill or technical ability

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    There is a very valid and growing concern that to few companies control to much of the activity on the internet, and that those companies now treat what used to be customers as a product instead. Yes there are programs, scripts, add-ons that users can use, install, and run in order to add a layer of personal protection and privacy, but the point behinds these laws are that people shouldn't have to do that, and most people aren't at a computer competency level in order to make these counter-measures work properly.
    Being dumber than a fucking housecat is not a valid reason for legislation. And considering that the last time the government decided to legislate the internet to protect us all, we got the DMCA, anyone who wants the government to take another whack at regulating the internet ought to be summarily executed (and that includes "net neutrality shit" too). If people are honestly too fucking stupid to access the "privacy" tab in any modern browser, that's too fucking bad. The solution isn't to alter the way everyone else uses the internet and regulate what consensual agreements are available to those of us with 2 IQ points to rub together, the solution is to encourage anyone so unbelievably idiotic to run with scissors and let natural selection take its course.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Look at your Tor/FF bundle how badly it breaks on modern websites.
    It doesn't, actually (just this one, and presumably some other vBulletin sites), and it's hardly required to opt out of Facebook and/or Google analytics. Reject tracking cookies. Use Noscript. Browse "incognito."

    Oh, but no, the much more reasonable approach is to ban everyone from offering or accepting tracking cookies, or targeted ads.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Also not seeing the choice and compulsion angle. Someone has just as much luck and choice in avoiding an arrest with or without conviction (for whatever reason) as they of avoiding being caught in a picture by someone who happens to know who they are.
    When the cops take your mugshot, and upload it for everyone to see, you don't have a say in the matter. Either in associating with the foot-soldiers in America's war on liberty, or in what they do with your picture.

    However, everyone's free to not use Facebook, and anyone who actually gives a shit about their privacy, doesn't. They offer a "service," and in exchange for this massively useless timesuck, one of the terms is to hand over your data and give up any semblance of privacy on the web. It's a shit deal, but a shit deal half a billion people have voluntarily agreed to. If you don't like their god-awful privacy policies and the way they use what you upload to them... stop using them. Don't force ashatted legislation (that won't work and will only serve to come back and bite us in the ass, like the DMCA did) on everyone else, because of some theoretical twit who's such a pathetic approximation of an adult that they need mommy and daddy the government to protect them from their own decisions and force the rest of the world to cater to their inability to function in society as well as a 3rd grader.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  26. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    What?
    Didn't you at one point talk about splitting up the adsense revenue if it amounted to anything, and everyone replied with a "nah, keep it" attitude?
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  27. #27
    Unencrypted Wraith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Didn't you at one point talk about splitting up the adsense revenue if it amounted to anything, and everyone replied with a "nah, keep it" attitude?
    Oh, yeah. I thought you were saying I wanted to bill people for usage of this site. I even hate the idea of a donate button.

  28. #28
    Thats my bad, saw invoice and thought payout Guess I was still stuck thinking about users being a product when enoch was referring to the customer angle.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    Worse than that, they're insisting upon a violation of the laws of physics - information cannot be destroyed.

  30. #30
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,152
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    Oh, I'm sorry, Dread. Are strong Privacy rules now luddite? You moron. Look up the definition for luddite first, you idiot. Are you jerking off again on the idea that once again you can educate us lowly Europeans on how wrong our ways are? Can someone please now strip you of your modhat and show you for the troll you are?
    I think one part of being a moderator is not sinking to this kind of level.

    I've yet to see why the government digitizing a book with bankruptcy laws is fine, but indexing it on the Web is a violation of privacy.

    I've yet to be enlightened as to how a tool that let's me group and label my personal photos based on who is in each photo constitutes a beach of privacy. It's almost as if European Data Protection Czars believe being photographed steals the soul of everyone in the photo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Some countries understand that some businesses and tactics are to widespread and monopolistic to use the simple minded "you can always not use them" idea. Facebook is almost required for background checks, networking, and most businesses. Google analytics come into play with google adsense, which is nearly impossible to avoid because you don't know before hand which sites do and don't use their service.

    [...]They contained only a fraction of how someone used their internet access (and yet it was still possible to pin point 1 data point out of 7 billion), and every search they conducted, if done through google (or any site tied to a google service), would have provided the same information and more.

    [...]Yep, complete comprehension fail here. No one has banned facebook's ability to upload photos (at least in anything you've linked to). Because, again, its not the service thats the problem, its how its being used.
    Running with an incognito browser and clearing files on your computer resets the ability of the AdSense, Analytics or many of the other cookies out there to ever stick to your computer.

    Saying that Facebook is "required" for background checks is a farce. Sure, it's worthwhile for networking. Then again, so is LinkedIn, Google+ and a host of other services. You're conflating the size of specific services with compulsion to use them, and a faux need to tell these services that they can't make use of the data that people are freely and willingly giving to them.

    Even the search case is an example of how limited (and "user-generated") that input really is. When someone enters their own name and address in a search engine to see what comes up, they've sorta broken down the barrier. That's why it's stupid for these companies to release this information openly like AOL did in 2006, but it's also why none of them do that.

    Germany is telling Facebook that people can't use a key new feature of its photo service. What's next? Facebook has to delete all captions and photo tags because they could contain personal information identifying people in a photo? Beyond the stunting of innovation, the slippery slope and freedom of speech issues are massive.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •