I honestly still donât get, what exactly all this is for.
Why are companies pumping more and more money into advertising? What do they expect us to do? Most people canât spend more money and if you have to increase prices because of your overblown ad budget, theyâre even less likely to do so.
And what exactly are they thinking theyâre getting from companies like Google and Meta? The amount of ads I get that are actually relevant and not super-obvious is miniscule. Ad tech does not work even remotely as well as advertised.
Seriously, that sounds like such a bullshit approach. Itâs uneconomical for the criminals. Itâs super involved and doesnât pay that much. Why would anyone do that, if regular fraud is right there to commit.
Or, bear with me, just send a massive amount of spam mails to leaked mailing lists. Maybe 1 in a million reacts and you scam them (cfr all the âNigerian princeâ scams.
A looooot less work because the victimâs will contact you themselves. No need to go and âcompare which phones show up together and them figure out why they were together and then figure out if it was an affair or not and then contact them in the hopes they care enough to pay ransomâ
You donât get it because you donât have the endless supply of information on ever man woman and child on earth.
The information is valuable so they can continue to squeeze every cent out of everyone Iâm every way possible, including those who canât afford to spend it.
Youâd be surprised the amount of times Iâve heard someone say they got something after seeing a targeted ad. I personally just zone out until the adâs done. Itâs hard to believe people actually pay attention, and then go so far as clicking the ad and buying the product.
It definitely should be, but I have heard at least 2 people make that statement, so the fact that itâs not 0 is mind blowing. Maybe I just need better friends.
I, too, am curious if thereâs an advertising bubble. I hope so.
Iâve noticed something about my wife, though. Sheâs not a âmindless capitalist zombie with the sole goal of owning more stuffâ, but she does pay attention to advertising a lot. We need more diapers? Well, it just so happens thereâs some new startup app thatâs advertising a free first month, so if she signs up for that up, we could get free diapers, and weâd only have to keep the membership for another two months, and they have deals on peanut butter, and weâd get access to their free streaming service and they have Disney, so itâs probably worth it overall.
And so it goes, with a million of these deals. The thing is, each âdealâ is so complicated that itâs extremely difficult to know which ones weâre actually saving money on. The cynical would say âyouâre never saving money: everythingâs riggedâ, but thatâs clearly not true. Some of these deals clearly do work out for us (and some of them cause the startup to immediately go bankrupt). But most of them arenât clearly better or worse for us: weâd have to spend several hours going through hypothetical scenarios to do the full CBA, which we donât do.
I do wonder, on balance, how much itâs costing us. I also wonder how many of these deals are specifically (personally) targeted at my wife because they know what she needs and what her habits are.
Thatâs because youâre not a typical consumer. Average consumer those ads target is a mindless capitalist zombie with the sole goal of owning more stuff. Especially in US (but not only) people are trained by their capitalist master that âyou are what you ownâ and spending money is a way of living there. Iâm sure you see it everywhere. People go absolutely crazy over brands like Marvel or Star Wars and spend thousands of dollars on useless gadgets. People go crazy over snickers and buy hundredths of pairs. People go crazy over phones and and take credit just to own the latests model. And the ads are there to program those people into wanting more and more things.
Security risk is the bigger concern IMHO. These devices are often a security weak point for networks. Putting them on their own wifi network and then isolating that network is critical.
How can you ensure this is done? There are so many devices that need to connect to the internet and some that require access to other network devices to function.
You basically need to employ network engineering level security - very tight firewall rules, use NAT where itâs available (IPv6 removes NAT, which ipv6 apologists will tell you is a good thing - theyâre wrong, as it removes per-service level control and moves it out to per-device/per-NIC), and punch very specific holes to grant access where needed.
I donât think that the issue is that people donât know; people donât care. They donât understand how horrible the loss of privacy is, and think that the marginal convenience of being able to control your thermostat from your workplace, or have your refrigerator add milk to your shopping list outweighs the negatives of them being turned into botnets, or monetizing all of your data to squeeze every last penny out of you.
I agree. There are far too many people with the âif Iâm not doing anything wrong, then what have I to hide?â mindset. Iâve seen people unironically say that all Tor users must be engaging in illegal activity, and I donât think it occurs to them that in many parts of the world, freely accessing information is an illegal activity, and by adopting this mindset weâre empowering that type of state.
I like the way a coworker put it to me, itâs the same reason we have locks on our doors and curtains on our windows, itâs not because we have something to hide, but a right to privacy that tech giants have widely ignored.
The difference is the part immediately after you stopped quoting:
They donât understand how horrible the loss of privacy isâŠ
What OP is saying here is that people know abstractly that smart devices are not privacy friendly, but they donât understand how big a deal that actually can be.
Not understanding is the same as not knowing. I know that a car pollutes the environment but I donât understand just how much. I donât know the info.
We also shouldnât be conditioned to just accept terms of services with no recourse, by this point I think most people just press accept and know by now whatever it is there, isnât worth the trouble of fighting to have it changed. So companies get to legally have a free for all with your privacy, cause you consented to things youâll later find out you didnât even know you consented for.
It helps once, but does it push notifications when the TOS changes from the last time you read it?
The TOS could switch from protecting your data to sharing it for money at any point in time and that would apply to any existing data. Unless you know you can get them to delete it, the fact that the TOS used to say something does not matter once they change it.
@snooggums@throws_lemy@HelixDab2@Jessvj93 ofc thatâs always the risk you take when using any service. Sadly a lot of the time the ToS is so long itâd take forever to read but this is the closest Iâve been able to find to quick overviews on the the ToS of a specified service.
Note that it does not have every service critiqued as I think ppl with TOSDR manually read the ToS and evaluate.
The TOS are the legal equivalent of a locked car door. Itâs the bare minimum prevention against a lawsuit, but really doesnât protect anything. Itâs because they are so long and opaque that they are often unenforceable.
ToS are the worst thing ever. They are âcontractsâ that you are required to sign to do literally anything in the world but are not allowed to negotiate and can be modified at any time without your consent and your original signing is propagated to the new contract and it is still considered binding. Also, they are allowed to put clauses in which hand over rights to your property, intellectual or otherwise, which is irrevocable and perpetual. Additionally, you have many âsoftwareâ providers putting clauses in which state that you only lease the license, you do not own it. Even if you have a physical media with the software, you only purchased a lease and it is therefore illegal for you to resell it. They are also allowed to revoke your lease at anytime, without recompense of any sort. That is the real power of SaaS, not the subscription, but the fact that nobody is ever allowed to own something, no matter how much money you have paid.
Yes, as others have said, they are virtually unenforceable, but it does happen often enough to make sure you are afraid of it.
I also feel many donât understand the full extent, either. Theyâre used to using fairly secure devices in their everyday life (often not realizing how much the software they install is also spying on them), so why wouldnât these IoT things also be secure?
In my experience, itâs all very vague and ethereal until the risks are highlighted for them. âSo what if Google can read all of my emails? What could they possibly do with that information, anyway; why should I care?â is an example of a portion of a real conversation Iâve had.
âoh we canât possibly understand that field, as there is no agreed industry standard for how to treat itâ - Get out, you know exactly what it means.
Hi guys, thanks for yur help. With âSimple clockâ and âclock youâ the problem is that when I turn my screen off, the alarm doesnt work. I donât understand cause I unabled all authorisation possible with these apps. How can I solve it ? My phone is a TCL with Android 11.
So you want oppressed people to use the Chinese Yuan or Russian Rubel and Argentinian Pesos as their Currency (super unstable in value due to inflation, highly surveiled) rather than giving them choice to use something like Monero to transact in privacy?
If you do not live in a dictatorship you have no right to comment on the usefulness of a privacy preserving tool. Maybe you do not see its value, but others in different situations than yours might need it.
Yeah sure it should be used for its utility on a needs-basis, I donât really disagree with you or care if people use it for whatever reason they want to.
Point was that as a global general-use currency it doesnât provide much added utility for the average person or provide a real solution for any of the underlying structural issues that people say it does.
privacyguides
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.