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.
The company had deemed him a risk simply because, as the letter put it, "[o]ther customers who ha[d] used their card at establishments where [Kevin] recently shopped have a poor repayment history with American Express."4 When Kevin sought an explanation, the company was unwilling to share any information on which of businesses - many of them major retailers - contributed to American Exp
wexie wrote: » Wibbs quoted an article a few pages back, this is a quote from it : So what if suddenly it's not just what you buy, but when you buy it, where you buy it and crucially, the behaviours of other people, not related to you, who happen to buy similar things in similar places? Would you care then? Because that is how these algorithms work. If an insurance company can work out from data at their disposal that people who buy a certain brand of biscuit from a certain shop have an increased chance of getting X health problems what do you think they will do to the premiums of those people? Now these are probably excesses in the US and we're unlikely to see similar issues here (yet) but I think it's in everybody's interest to make sure it stays that way.
Patww79 wrote: » I still wouldn't care at all. So long as what I've bought is up to scratch and I've paid three correct amount then it's all good.
wexie wrote: » I guess it's true what they say about ignorance and bliss. You are truly blessed in your own special way Pat
Patww79 wrote: » You're the one that thinks it's a big issue if a company knows how much you spent and where/when you spent it. I'd save the condescension for yourself really.
bluewolf wrote: » No i'm holding out for replicators earl grey tea, hot
wexie wrote: » That's not quite the issue we're talking about here Pat, and I'd try to explain it to you but I think it would be both unkind of me and a waste of my time. Feel free to read any of the links already posted in the thread though.
Patww79 wrote: » Unkind of you. Like I said, save the condescension because no matter what you throw up I'm not going to believe anything other than you talking out of your paranoid hole.
wexie wrote: » Ah now, there's no need for that Pat, you're usually so classy?!
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.
Patww79 wrote: » That said, give me a screen and an internet connection over having to listen to everyone bar about 4-5 people in my life.
Patww79 wrote: » The correct one. You lot always play that card and you're always wrong when you do.
Wibbs wrote: » I suppose it's handy for the more misanthrope or isolationist among us.
Wibbs wrote: » You lot eh? Hate to break this news to you, but just because you say it's wrong doesn't mean it is, certainly not when you can't/don't back up your position with anything approaching an argument. I'm alright Jack, seems to be the sum of it. I fear the attempt will be fruitless, but I like a lost cause, so let's examine this "I've nothing to hide" argument shall we? Let's ignore privacy entirely and just take the law. No doubt you see yourself as law abiding upstanding member of society? Most of us do. However you have almost certainly broken a multitude of laws and regulations in your lifetime. Like we all have. Do you have a 100% encyclopaedic knowledge of the laws and regulations in Ireland? Of course not. Other than creeping over the speed limit in your car, there are highly likely to be a few laws you broke without even realising it. If you're being surveilled 24/7 you will break some law or other, however trivial and you are far more likely to be charged and convicted for it. Someone once said (and I sadly can't recall who, but they were IIRC someone in some dictatorship's service): Show me a page from the diary of an innocent man and I'll find you enough evidence to have him hanged. Further on that point: Bad laws. Today being Gay is not a crime. Neither is seeking information or traveling for an abortion(and abortion itself will be reexamined, because of a recent vote). Again imagine you are being monitored 24/7 and you were Gay in 1950's Ireland, or you looked for information or travelled to the UK for an abortion. You would be breaking what we would see as a bad law today. If you were gay it would be almost impossible to have a relationship however brief. Even two sided discussion of bad laws would be made extremely difficult if your every utterance and movements were being monitored. Democracy depends on as free a dissemination of new ideas and arguments as possible. Living in such a monitored world that notion would have a hard life. We have no bad laws left? Oh you can be sure we do and plenty of them. After all 1950's you would have thought we were mostly set and you would have heard precious few discussions about a different approach, so would keep believing it. Unless you were one of the weaker members of society that the bad laws targeted. When you say you've nothing to hide, you're effectively saying you don't care about the evolution of laws and rights and how those laws and rights are protected. You're also saying it in a very individualistic manner. I'm alright Jack essentially. Never mind wider society, imagine if one of those 4-5 people in your life did have something to hide from a bad law. What then?
tritriagain wrote: » Laughed my arse off at above. So true.work in retail and people paying with cards for very small amounts are a pain. Had one woman recently hand me 3 items while she was on the phone (rude for a start) . She than realised she was paying with her phone. Her head nearly exploded because she couldn't figure out what to do. I hope cash never dies. I would never go anywhere without a bit of cash.
joe40 wrote: » I understand the dangers of big data and the way it can be used to influence and manipulate behaviours in large sections of the population. But haven't population always been fairly malleable and easily influenced. Look how many young men were convinced by extreme nationalism to off to war and be killed in ww1 for example. This was pure manipulation on behalf off their leaders.
jimbobaloobob wrote: » sounds futuristic but then im not one to keep up with technology. Not sure id be comfortable to trust it, especially around Galways rush hours
dan1895 wrote: » Can't remember where I read the following but I found the below to be interesting and it applies to all generations. Any technology that exists when your born is seen as the norm. Lightbulbs, cars, planes, tv's etc. Any tech invented/developed before you hit your late 20's is seen as groundbreaking, exciting, innovative, cutting edge,must have. Mobile phones, high speed internet, bluetooth, wifi. Any tech developed after your late 20's is seen as unneccesary, dangerous, going to far, only going to be used for bad. Look at the cynicism surrounding the likes of self drive cars and Alexa. Obviously doesnt apply to everyone or everything but do find myself questioning new technology and why would anyone bother with it.
Wibbs wrote: » When you say you've nothing to hide, you're effectively saying you don't care about the evolution of laws and rights and how those laws and rights are protected.
Wibbs wrote: » Further on that point: Bad laws.
Patww79 wrote: » Essential for blowhard avoidance.
Bold = 100,000,000%
Also, you pointing out that someone isn't automatically right doesn't afford you the same. People believe what they believe and minds won't be changed and to be honest I think most of what you've argued above is tripe but more power to you if you want to live by it.
amacca wrote: » Thats one of the potentially scary things about it for me anyway....I don't like being brought along for the ride by a bunch of brainwashed morons who can't or won't think for themselves.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » If you want to be afraid of technology that's fine. Soil yourself to your heart's content. I suppose the next question is to ask what those people with soggy britches actually do differently to the rest of us? The ones on these thread obviously don't avoid the internet. He OP started by telling us about a piece of optional tech they use but absolutely doesn't have to. And another poster told us about how all this tech is forced upon us. What does a 21st century Luddite do?
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » I’m a technologist. I work in the space. I even work in AI. Doesn’t mean I agree that all technology is good.
FixdePitchmark wrote: » The targeted adds are just getting a bit scary They are using your location Anything you do It is freaky and ridiculously invasive. They GDPR - it is not inconceivable that they will have to protect location at some point legally.
paleoperson wrote: » I really hate the ignorant and clueless people who use words like "luddite" and say something like "why don't you live in mudhuts" to dismiss anti-technology sentiments. Like can they really have that simple-minded a thinking process, it's so much more complicated than that.
