Technology starting to scare me?

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I see people work themselves into a lather about how Orwellian it all is, but I’ve yet to see someone who claims to have been harmed by big data, or even claims to know how they could be harmed by big data.

I take it you're unaware of how companies like Cambridge Analytica have used big data to undermine democratic processes and potentially affect global economic and political stability?

wexie

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm gonna have to agree that cash is important. People should have their privacy.

Anyone who gets their heritage etc. checked on something like 23 and me is trusting that that data will never get into the hands of a health insurance company. They wouldn't even have to disclose it.

That's nothing to do with cash or a lack thereof though is it?

If people pay cash to 23andme they can pass the results on to the health insurance company just the same.

I think there are two issues here that seem to get confounded a lot.

One is gathering the data, which in and of itself is harmless, data is just that. The other is using that data.

The data that 23andme hold on a customer is completely harmless until it gets passed to the health insurance company (or until the health insurance company decides to use it to base prices on.

The same goes with the data that Facebook has, it was mostly harmless until such time Cambridge Analytics decided to use it for nefarious purposes.

Even if it did get to a cashless society (I think it will eventually) that doesn't necessarily mean any of those horror scenario's come to pass unless there aren't very clear regulations as to who has the data, who can use it, for what purposes, who can it be passed onto etc. etc.

Therein lies the real problem, it's not the gathering of the info it's the use.

And at the moment I think legislation worldwide is very much lagging behind the developments.

Wibbs

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sounds like old people complaining about new things.

Jesus, you're like a bot stuck in repeat phrase mode. You do realise that it was and remains just as many "old people" as "young people" who came up with and improve these "new things". On the cashless transactions front in the UK, who pushed the percentage over the halfway point? Pensioners. Though I do recall you were one of the people on another thread who suggested that previous generations were more wasteful than people today. A demonstrable nonsense.

I see people work themselves into a lather about how Orwellian it all is, but I’ve yet to see someone who claims to have been harmed by big data, or even claims to know how they could be harmed by big data.

There are quite the few ways "big data" can cause harm.

Over in Americaland a Senate committee back in 2013 heard testimony about data brokers, which tend to fall outside the remit of more archaic privacy legislation, who had and were selling lists of things like the background and contact details of police officers, dementia sufferers, addiction sufferers, genetic disease sufferers, domestic violence victims, even addresses of rape victims(yep) and a long list of other groups that might be valuable to target.

Have a read of this study from 2016 into credit scoring and big data. One guy's credit rating was dropped for no actual history of repayment problems(he was actually much safer financially than background)simply because they tracked where he shopped and found that more people who also shopped there were more likely to default on loans. That's just one example.

Hell, even Google has been found to tailor ads depending on gender and in searches for jobs showed men more higher paying jobs more often. Cuddly "liberal" google(which we well know, or should, at this stage is bollocks. Bottom line rules).

Have a read of this study into targeted ads.

Have you forgotten Facebook and Oxford Analytica and political persuasion?

How anyone can believe that big data doesn't have the risk of real harm, socially and personally and has shown it already, clearly has their head in the sand, or is simply ignorant of how it could.

PS and NB, I came up with a counterargument, with links going to extensive reports on the matter. If you do have a counterargument, try and do similar, rather than flick your "old people" switch.

Wibbs

wexie wrote: »

And at the moment I think legislation worldwide is very much lagging behind the developments.

And will continue to do so Wex as so long as there is the mind blowing mountain of cash to be made from this data, big companies with deep pockets will fight any government interference. Plus it's the world wide web. So what if say Ireland brings in data regs? The data farmers will use countries who they could buy out their national debt and operate from there. Unless somewhere bans data gathering entirely and that genie is long outa the bottle and your average Joe and Jane would fight it anyway as they think Alexa/Siri, shure, t'isn't it harmless and I want to know where I can order a pizza from.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

wexie wrote: »

One is gathering the data, which in and of itself is harmless, data is just that. The other is using that data.

The problem is that once a company has gathered all this data, it has a strong incentive to monetize that data. The companies hovering around record-breaking $1 trillion valuations recently were Apple, Amazon, and Alphabet, Inc., parent company of Google. Two out of three are noted collectors of data.

wexie

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

The problem is that once a company has gathered all this data, it has a strong incentive to monetize that data. The companies hovering around record-breaking $1 trillion valuations recently were Apple, Amazon, and Alphabet, Inc., parent company of Google. Two out of three are noted collectors of data.

I will happily put money on that being three out of three, just because one (Amazon I presume you mean) hasn't yet had a scandal come out in the open doesn't mean they don't use the data at their disposal.

Franz Von Peppercorn

wexie wrote: »

Most of the ones you've listed above is already information Google (for example) might have purely based on tracking your online behaviours and your whereabouts. It's not just location tracking they use for phones, it's also the SSID of whatever WiFi you're using to go online. They know where those particular SSIDs are located geographically because the Google cars just happened to record whichever ones they were able to detect. Ever wonder how come when you open Google maps on a laptop or PC it seems to know where you are?

Knowing where you are is not the same as knowing what you are buying for cash.

Franz Von Peppercorn

wexie wrote: »

I will happily put money on that being three out of three, just because one (Amazon I presume you mean) hasn't yet had a scandal come out in the open doesn't mean they don't use the data at their disposal.

I assume he meant Apple aren’t a major data collector. It’s not their business model.

Of course amazon know your purchases. That is their business model.

J Mysterio

Arthur Daley wrote: »

There are other search engines beyond only using google all the time.

Qwant claims not to track you, it is a French based alternative.

Also DuckDuckGo

wexie

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I assume he meant Apple aren’t a major data collector. It’s not their business model.

Of course amazon know your purchases. That is their business model.

Was there not some kind of scandal a while ago that Iphones (too) track your location whether you like it or not?

wexie

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Knowing where you are is not the same as knowing what you are buying for cash.

Of course not, but lets stick with the example of the divorce proceedings, if you're logged as being in a strip club it's not likely going to matter much whether or not you actually did get that lap dance.

It's not entirely the same of course and I get your point, just pointing out that a lot of the issues people foresee with a cashless society are here already.

AndrewJRenko

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I see this a lot. Orwellian this and big data that. Data is the price we pay for ‘free’ internet service. I get that it feels strange for google to know where you buy things from your milk to your sex toys.

I see people work themselves into a lather about how Orwellian it all is, but I’ve yet to see someone who claims to have been harmed by big data, or even claims to know how they could be harmed by big data.

Sounds like old people complaining about new things.

Get this book from your local library and report back.

https://www.amazon.com/Weapons-Math-Destruction-Increases-Inequality/dp/0553418815

OldMrBrennan83

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

If you're comfortable with large tech companies tracking every shop you visit and everything you purchase, and selling that information on to third parties, you'll be happy enough in a cashless world.

Some cultures are still very attached to cash. In Germany, for instance, many shops and restaurants are still cash-only; Aldi and Ikea only began accepting credit cards in 2016. Often, these differences reflect well-founded historical concerns about privacy, surveillance, and the state. Other countries, like Sweden, which have a high level of trust in the state, are eager to go entirely cashless -- but there are millions of Europeans who are not yet ready to acquiesce to ubiquitous tracking of their every transaction.

I'm extremely happy for that to happen. What do you think they're going to do to you?

Church on Tuesday

The thing that scares me most is that the art of conversation in real time is kinda slowly dying.

People are so engrossed with their devices now that if you are having a conversation with someone over a pint or coffee or whatever, they just HAVE to check that message or notification. I find it rude, I'm giving you all my attention and I expect you to do the same. Otherwise, what is the point?

Anytime I'm out with friends or family, I turn my phone off completely. I consider it quality time with people I care about and I don't want to be distracted or interrupted by mostly pointless notifications or messages.

OldMrBrennan83

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

The thing that scares me most is that the art of conversation in real time is kinda slowly dying.

People are so engrossed with their devices now that if you are having a conversation with someone over a pint or coffee or whatever, they just HAVE to check that message or notification. I find it rude, I'm giving you all my attention and I expect you to do the same. Otherwise, what is the point?

Anytime I'm out with friends or family, I turn my phone off completely. I consider it quality time with people I care about and I don't want to be distracted or interrupted by mostly pointless notifications or messages.

Since the Celtic tiger people are extremely boring and that's what's killing conversation. Nobody wants to listen to some ****ing blowhard tell you how many countries he's visited for work or what school little fiachra is enrolled in. Phones are just a godsend to avoid having to interact with these cans of piss.

Most of the 'phones stop people talking!' merchants never seem to have an issue when someone is reading a book in the exact same scenarios though.

wakka12

kneemos wrote: »

Technology has advanced in ways to sell you crap, otherwise not much has changed since the seventies.

I agree it hasnt really progressed as much as wed like in a lot of important areas that actually matter. Id much rather see technology improving to help manage illnesses like alzheimers or depression, or ways of creating cheaper faster housing for poor people, than some new phone that keeps getting skinnier and smaller or some other superficial gadget that really makes no significant increase in quality oflife for anybody

Sure being able to talk to your phone on siri might make some things easier and faster, or having your car drive for you is quite cool..but in reality if everybody still had blockias wed all be fine...I dont think anybody hates driving so much that we need robots to do it for us..its just superficial developments of amazing inventions which did transform lives, the automobile, and being able to community over telephone with people far away, it just seems like wasted money and human talent and engineering to keep developing these pieces of technology imo

Church on Tuesday

Patww79 wrote: »

Since the Celtic tiger people are extremely boring and that's what's killing conversation. Nobody wants to listen to some ****ing blowhard tell you how many countries he's visited for work or what school little fiachra is enrolled in. Phones are just a godsend to avoid having to interact with these cans of piss.

Most of the 'phones stop people talking!' merchants never seem to have an issue when someone is reading a book in the exact same scenarios though.

I like to try and have interesting conversations and steer well way from folk like that, still I find the phone zombie thing creeping in all the same with my own social circle.

And if I agreed to meet you for a pint or coffee chances are you won't be reading a book.

OldMrBrennan83

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I like to try and have interesting conversations and steer well way from folk like that, still I find the phone zombie thing creeping in all the same with my own social circle.

Fair enough if you're out with people you've chosen to be with and they're distracted in any way (doesn't need to be technology), but so many people (idiots) boil at the sight of a stranger that has nothing to do with them looking at a phone (and like I said, they wouldn't cast it a thought if it was something more high brow like a book).

OldMrBrennan83

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I like to try and have interesting conversations and steer well way from folk like that, still I find the phone zombie thing creeping in all the same with my own social circle.

Fair enough if you're out with people you've chosen to be with and they're distracted in any way (doesn't need to be technology), but so many people (idiots) boil at the sight of a stranger that has nothing to do with them looking at a phone (and like I said, they wouldn't cast it a thought if it was something more high brow like a book).

That said, give me a screen and an internet connection over having to listen to everyone bar about 4-5 people in my life.

wexie

wakka12 wrote: »

..its just superficial developments of amazing inventions which did transform lives, the automobile, and being able to community over telephone with people far away, it just seems like wasted money and human talent and engineering to keep developing these pieces of technology imo

They're just the bits of technology we see in day to day life though...

If you look at things like nanotechnology, gene technology, artificial intelligence the technology is moving at a completely unprecedented pace.

Just because at the consumer end it all just translates into cheap (and not so cheap) gadgets doesn't mean it's not happening.

It's now possible for two parents with genetic disorders to have a child that doesn't have that genetic disorder.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/01/permission-given-to-create-britains-first-three-person-babies

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Patww79 wrote: »

I'm extremely happy for that to happen. What do you think they're going to do to you?

I'm not concerned that "they" are going to do anything to me specifically, but I worry about the loss of privacy and the increase in state surveillance and control that a cashless society would represent.

OldMrBrennan83

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

I'm not concerned that "they" are going to do anything to me specifically, but I worry about the loss of privacy and the increase in state surveillance and control that a cashless society would represent.

I'm not buying anything I shouldn't be, so they can watch away.

peasant

Technology as such isn't all that scary (if used correctly) what is scary though is our dependency on it. Things...everything from getting money to producing food...is so dependent on tech these days that if the tech ever failed, we'd be royally stuffed.

No need even to imagine "evil" enemies bringing our tech down with sabotage or war...something as "simple" as a giant solar flare or two (not at all inconceivable) could stuff electricity supplies and all electronics for weeks or months.

Imagine a world without power for more than a week...and then remember that society is only ever three meals away from anarchy.

Enjoy your dinner

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Patww79 wrote: »

I'm not buying anything I shouldn't be, so they can watch away.

Ah, the old "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" argument.

coffee_cake

Patww79 wrote: »

I'm not buying anything I shouldn't be, so they can watch away.

I never liked the "nothing to hide" argument. While i love tech and electronic payments, and have nothing to hide, i also don't want my cc statement being shouted in the street

Revolut is the business

OldMrBrennan83

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

Ah, the old "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" argument.

The correct one. You lot always play that card and you're always wrong when you do.

kneemos

Patww79 wrote: »

I'm not buying anything I shouldn't be, so they can watch away.

They can deduct all sorts of things from your buying habits.
Number of children,income,likely voting choice,age and probably loads of other crap.

OldMrBrennan83

bluewolf wrote: »

I never liked the "nothing to hide" argument. While i love tech and electronic payments, and have nothing to hide, i also don't want my cc statement being shouted in the street

Revolut is the business

Nobody is going to be shouting anything in the street.

OldMrBrennan83

kneemos wrote: »

They can deduct all sorts of things from your buying habits.
Number of children,income,likely voting choice,age and probably loads of other crap.

So what? Like really, I'll tell them all that if they want so I don't care if they know by my buying habits.

kneemos

Patww79 wrote: »

So what? Like really, I'll tell them all that if they want so I don't care if they know by my buying habits.

Yeah it's not just yours though. They can map demographics for each area.
Advertising companies,political parties or others can use this to target their audience.
Not saying I give a shoite either but the full extent of what happens with all of this info should be public knowledge.