The Good and Bad of Data Collection 146
Nephilium writes "Reason magazine has dedicated their latest issue to a discussion of privacy and data collection. They sent subscribers a customized cover of the magazine [as previously covered on Slashdot]. Some good points as to the benefits and drawbacks of who is sharing your information." The sample targeted advertisements are for non-profit organizations, but it may not be long until someone figures out how much companies will pay to utilize this sort of targeting.
Good (Score:5, Interesting)
The sample targeted advertisements are for non-profit organizations, but it may not be long until someone figures out how much companies will pay to utilize this sort of targeting.
I'd much rather have ads sent to me about things that I might actually want or be interested in. For example, sending feminine hygine ads to me is a waste of their time and mine.
How'bout NO ADS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:5, Insightful)
(on a side note, if advertisers got serious about targeted ads, people like you, who don't respond well to ads wouldn't get any)
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:4, Insightful)
But isn't the problem that if/when targeted advertising - if 'Real Ultimate Precision Advertising' (RUPA) is possible - it would simply become the new "entry-level"? (I.e. nolonger a competitive advantage; not an edge but a requirement.)
It immediately becomes the new status quo (as the "shotgun approach" is today), and every company looking to stand out - and they all want/have to - must now do RUPA plus X, and Y, and Z, and
And marketing people know, as well as we do in all honesty, that everybody responds to advertising - in one form or another. Perhaps today not so much to regular 'ads' (as in TV commercials, or ads in a magazine), but if not that, then to product placements, or celebrity spokespersons, or sponsorships, or viral marketing, or astroturfing-word-of-mouth campaigns, or
So my fear is, that we won't se less ads/marketing ploys, but more - only they will be targeted to our specific 'profiles'... Advertisers certainly have the will/need and budgets for it to happen.
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:4, Insightful)
Yep, it's called "Brand building". Even if they will never buy your product, they at least now may find it familiar when they hear about it again. Or, in more evil terms, "mindshare".
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:4, Insightful)
And looking at my latest Circuit Cellar, I see a full-page add for a PSoC device that looks pretty cool, and that I wouldn't have known about otherwise. And 'going to the store' to browse for this sort of thing is pretty much out of the question.
Now, if I could replace every feminine hygene ad I see with one for an embedded device C compiler, PC-based oscilloscope, or something else that actually interests me, that'd be great.
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:5, Informative)
I also must admit I've never once disliked the ads in those magazines, I could even truthfully say I buy them as much for the ads as anything else. But the truth is, no one gets rich in marketing letting people know about products they would already want. So this stuff about "if they only had more data, they'd target us" is bullshit. They'll still be trying to sell you a subscription to GQ, the latest fashion deoderant, and GM sports car.
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:1)
There's only one thing I like better than ice fishing [csbruce.com]..
..and that's sitting at home with my computer and a Transactor Magazine.
Now 95% Ad Free! [csbruce.com]
Re:How'bout NO ADS (Score:2, Insightful)
And how about the ma
Re:Good (Score:1)
Soul on Ice (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Soul on Ice (Score:2, Funny)
And if any of you moderators even think about moding that "Funny"...
Targeted Content (Score:5, Interesting)
Double your readership ;)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're in the business of being a political pundit, you want to read everything you can so you can talk about it. You need to see the opinions you disagree with too so you can start thinking of the ways to call those people wrong.
It'd be interesting to see... (Score:2, Funny)
"Lying Liars and the Lies they targeted at Me", or something like that.
Re:Targeted Content (Score:5, Insightful)
Political discourse these days isn't about debate, it's about volume, both in terms of quantity and decibel level.
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
Political discourse these days isn't about debate, it's about volume, both in terms of quantity and decibel level.
-----
Political correctness fostered this. Good proof hurts feelings. Hurt feelings results in witch hunts and lynchings. Since no one wants to be targeted nobody bothers to put together a good argument which exposes the core issues. Anyone who does think deeply enough to expose the core issues is summarily dismissed as a paranoid conspiracy theorist. If that person continues their tren
Re:Targeted Content (Score:1)
Personally I think that EVERYONE should do this. Even if you don't agree or even fully understand what you are reading, as long as it has *some* relevant information, I think its important to hear other ideas. Otherwise you are pigeon holing yourself without fully exploring other possbilities.
It really seems obvious, but how many people d
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:5, Interesting)
Apparently, if you know what kind of magazines are being sold in an area, you can assemble an accurate picture of the area's demographic, and use it to gauge market opportunites and stock management. For instance, high volumes of mens magazines begin sold in an area suggests it may be a good idea to open a Sporting goods store, conversely, a Department Store could infer that a lot of bridal and family magazines mean its time to stock baby strollers and family basics. The list went on and on, and even included municipal politians.
Due to constaints imposed by Canadian Privacy laws (i think), were not able to actually sell the quantity of any particular title, instead, we had to aggregate the titles into "subject categories" like Young Mens, Young Womens, Sport, Hobby, etc etc.
The markting agency that bought the information spent waaaaaaay more than i ever could have expected that information to be worth, and my technical liason was very bright, and had a very large (relatively) IT/Engineering group, so i figure they must have had a pretty slick set up. And, i just checked, they are still in business.
Interesting use of targeted content, i hadn't though of that project in years till reading this thread.
Re:Targeted Content (Score:3, Insightful)
Thus the further polarization of American politics.
that's why I like uncensored... (Score:1)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:1)
Picture a news magazine that could focus on current events in a reader's area along with the national news or leave out the style section for someone who couldn't care less.
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2, Interesting)
Even within the same TV channel, targeted programming is a well-established practice. NBC has "Friends" for the coveted 18-35 age group, "Frasier" for 35 and above, "Queer eyes" for gay
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
Oh wait, that would be TiVO...nevermind. I suppose when that is some type of standard in the box top itself...
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
In order to produce a magazine that caters either to left or right wingers depending on the viewer you have to do all the work to create two differnt magazines (which I am using to include web publications). Now why not just produce two magazines? People like being able to tell their friend to go look at a certain article, if content changes for the viewer they can't do this anymore making this sort of operation strictly less profitable than two se
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Targeted Content (Score:2)
Whatever side of a particular issue I tend to be on, I like to see the other side. Because sometimes I want to refute the other side
Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:5, Interesting)
Wired Magazine a year or so ago, I remember, had a page on how to regain privacy. Some of those tips included:
- Gaining access to a fake SSN
- Not using a Cell phone
- Never using a credit card
- Do not have a mortgage
Something most Americans are incapable of doing without moving to the woods and living off the land.
Re:Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:1)
Re:Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:2)
True, it's a tool that lets the rich gets richer. However, if you're not so poor that you've spent money you can't repay in the past, you're considered rich enough to get to keep using that tool.
Re:Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:2, Insightful)
It is only a problem if the rich get richer at the expense of the poor. In the case of credit we are looking at a mechanism that lets the rich get richer while bettering all of society (financing lets people start stores and industry which improves everyone's lot)
Re:Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:2)
Re:Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:2)
Anonymous cell phones are very easy. (Score:1)
Re:Anonymous cell phones are very easy. (Score:2)
Re:Regaining Privacy in the US (Score:3, Interesting)
You say that like it's a bad thing.
You better make it public land though. If you expect to have enough land of your own to live off of (you can do it with five acres, but you really want ten, half of it mature forest, half meadow) you'll likely need a mortgage. You'll certainly need to register a deed (which is public information).
But you can actually "live off the land" fairly well in cities too. Citi
Cool! (Score:1)
Re:Cool! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Cool! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Cool! (Score:2, Informative)
In terms of geocoding, we didn't try to go in and find a home address. That's why people with subscriptions pointing to PO boxes got a photo of the post office or city center. Even when there was an home address, sometimes the geocoding (pulling lat/long info based on street addr
Re:Cool! (Score:1)
Re:Cool! (Score:1)
Re:Cool! (Score:2)
Satellite images (Score:2, Informative)
Gobs and gobs of satellite data are available here - i worked at a small company that made heavy use of this. Takes some effort to figure out all the gobbledygoop, but the effort is all it costs to get data.
Cold and unbiased... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, the system isn't perfect, it's subject to GIGO just like any other computer system. However, compared to human decision making, it's a whole lot of a more fair process on the whole.
Re:Cold and unbiased... (Score:1)
From my experience as a mortgage broker, I've never seen and type of racism or dicrimination
Target for File 86 (Score:2, Interesting)
What bothers me the most about this is not the notion of loss of privacy, it is loss of *Choice*. When I worked as the only IT Staff at a non-profit (coincedance noted) I wanted all the information I could get, in whatever format to try to make the best and (unfortunately) least-expensive solutions.
This is just the biggest "brand" or brand name, being shoved down our throat
where can I get one? (Score:2)
Re:where can I get one? (Score:3, Informative)
I haven't looked for a home address there in a few years though so I'm not sure how up-to-date they are with the photos on file.
Re:where can I get one? (Score:2)
that sucks.
They've got some nice area 51 images though.
Re:where can I get one? (Score:3, Informative)
mapper.acme.com (Score:2)
-russ
Too bad for them (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Too bad for them (Score:2)
-russ
Re:Too bad for them (Score:2)
1 Raid on the house in the picture looking for seconsun.
2 Finding Uncle
3 Interrogating Uncle using some torture (hey.. i didn't say it was officials raiding his house... o.. wait.. nvm...)
"Seconsun live half a mile up the road" will probably be very quickly coming out of his mouth...
Re:Too bad for them (Score:2)
What's even scarier is that Reason says my location is supposedly the Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp. Hold on, there's someone banging on my front door. Back in a minu-
Fie (Score:4, Insightful)
It's easy to complain about a subjective loss of privacy. It's more difficult to appreciate how information swapping accelerates economic activity. Like many other aspects of modern society, benefits are dispersed, amounting to a penny saved here or a dollar discounted there. But those sums add up quickly.
There's almost the tone, here, that privacy and info-swapping are at odds with each other. What a shame.
<grrr>
ashcroft's eyeball (Score:5, Informative)
(from this cryptome eyeball [cryptome.org] - it is a lot of data since it covers 4 places, please don't slashdot)
Re:ashcroft's eyeball (Score:1)
Perhaps it's because they had this under the Ashcroft caption
U.S. Justice Department in Washington, D.C.
maybe there is some way to swap these photos (Score:2)
what, it was about terrorists right? who's taken away more of your freedom, bin laden or ashcroft?
Re:Ashcroft is homeless? (Score:2)
In "four-eyeballs.htm" updated 3 April 04, the MapQuest-generated location of 22 Third Street NE [Ashcroft address], Washington DC is not quite correct. It's actually the 3rd (or 4th?) house down from A Street on Third Street, near the other end of the block.
In the new high resolution image a white spot can plainly be seen in the NE corner of the intersection just north of 22 Third Street NE. This is the m
Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:5, Interesting)
Because information sharing is pervasive (and getting more so as time goes by) we, as consumers, are caught in a bind: If we demand more privacy, the cost will go up; if we don't demand that privacy, abuse of the system will cause all sorts of problems, too many to list here. Of course, this is a problem only for people who care.
Personally, I find myself caring about privacy in some cases and not in others. It's a trade off decision. What I want is the ability to protect my privacy when I do care, at the instant of the transaction with the merchant, even if I've dealt with that particular merchant in the past. In face-to-face transactions of low monetary value, I can use cash. But what about online transactions, or the purchase of more expensive items?
What I'd like to have is an anonymous credit card. One that's tied to a "numbered account" somewhere, managed by an institution that cares only about its numbered accounts. Money is transferred into an account, and the institution pays the credit card bills for that account. Period. Given our cryptographic skills now, someone should be able to provide blind transfers that do the job nicely.
Of course, this type of system could be abused. But it's a different kind of abuse, and my privacy is safe.
Re:Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:1)
You're right, of course. The prepaid cards exist and provide the anonymous transaction at the end, when they're used to purchase the final product/service, but they don't provide what I'm looking for at the beginning, when you buy the card itself.
An anonymous purchase of a prepaid card means paying cash for it, face-to-face with a merchant. If I'm paying cash for the card, I might as well pay cash for the final product. Plus, unle
Re:Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:2)
Re:Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:2)
In fact it is very well established that "loyalty" cards atually cause prices to rise [nocards.org] rather than fall.
Re:Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:2)
Well established? You have to be kidding.
There is no way people are going to willingly pay 50% more for their groceries consistently, yet that's what the "study" would have us believe.
I mean seriously. You think people aren't going to notice the difference between $100 and $150 when they go shopping?
If loyalty cards really made that big a difference in prices, any grocery store adopting such a program
they had those until last year (Score:1)
Re:Anonymous Credit Cards (Score:2)
two words: PO Box (Score:5, Interesting)
I first got a PO Box address in 2002, and the only thing I regret is that I didn't get one sooner. The UPS Store (formerly Mailboxes, Etc.) rents PO boxes out, too, and offer lots of other perks over the straight US Postal variety. For instance, you can call the store and ask them if you got any mail today, they'll check it and let you know, saving you the trip.
Simple way around all this (Score:5, Insightful)
Im serious, between paying cash where possible, that includes nearly EVERY local purchase, trade you key tags for grocery stores with your friends (as long as they arent valid for cashing checks)
No tinfoil here I just cant stand direct marketing, why in the hell should I give Radio Shack my phone number, I actually had a clerk say they HAD to ge one, 555-1212 or 867-5309 (867 is a local extension here) is my answer most of the time they dont even blink although some chuckle
Lay as low as possible, p[ay cash where possible and lie like hell when anyone asks any questions that could be used in targeted marketing.
Dont forget they found one of the 911 conspirators by his grocery store key thingy
Re:Simple way around all this (Score:4, Insightful)
I would be very careful about advocating ways to circumvent investigative techniques that are know to have led to the detention of terrorists or terrorist supporters. An unkind executive, legislative or judicial environment could easily make your life very unpleasant for this type of statement, and in Soviet Russia and/or Nazi Germany this sort of behaviour could easily lead to (and in Stalin's Russia, almost certainly WOULD have led to) execution. I know that the statement itself is devoid of malice, but not everybody would interpret it in the same way...
Re:Simple way around all this (Score:2)
Re:Simple way around all this (Score:1)
Video surveilence. It's everywhere. [infiltration.org]
Re:Simple way around all this (Score:2)
So what you're saying is, instead of hearing from Radio Shack, you want to hear from Radio Shack AND Bed, Bath, and Beyond. Instead of getting coupons for Hungry Man you want them for Lean Cuisine and Tampax?
I love direct marketing. Privacy is useful only for acts that are criminal, shameful, and romantic. If you're a criminal, you deserve it. If you're ashamed, get over it. And if it's pe
It's not just the insurers who know ... (Score:3, Informative)
Slow Down Cowboy! (Score:2)
I'd rather have my privacy, thanks (Score:4, Interesting)
We have very little privacy any more, and it's time to take a stand on what's left.
The most telling section was the description of how MBNA has benefited from information-sharing. How, if privacy advocates had their way, MBNA's profit model would be threatened. Well, you know what? I HATE MBNA! I detest them. They send me credit card applications continually, no matter what I do. I regularly return their postage-paid reply envelopes stuffed with whatever other trash comes in that day's mail, and if everyone else would do the same...maybe THAT would stop them. After all, who among us needs more credit? Are we not awash in it already?
Re:I'd rather have my privacy, thanks (Score:2)
Yeh, maybe it raises profits, but what happens to those profits? Do they just get sucked out of the economy to disappear, or do they eventually go back in? I think they would go back in eventually, when those rich fat cats pay their gardeners and maids and buy their new cars and all that stuff.
Also, I think the amount of cool shit that can be bought with a dollar or two in the western world is pretty freaking amazing compared with most any time in the history of humans really. You can try and tell me o
Re:I'd rather have my privacy, thanks (Score:2)
Do they just get sucked out of the economy to disappear, or do they eventually go back in? I think they would go back in eventually, when those rich fat cats pay their gardeners and maids and buy their new cars and all that stuff.
I'm assuming that this comment is meant seriously and that I did not miss the drips of irony (if I'm wrong, mod this post funny, or maybe mod it funny anyway).
Basicly you're saying that you're willing to reduce your privacy further for the "promise" of what is, in effect,
Re:I'd rather have my privacy, thanks (Score:2)
Well, I guess I'm not being totally serious, nor totally ironic either. I guess I was just responding to the parents post. If trickle down economics didn't work at all, then living in the US, you would probably have a not-so-great standard of living compared to much of the rest of the world. We both know this isn't the case however, the standard of living in the US is pretty damn good, with big corporations and wealthy fat cats as we call them, being a much larger portion of the economy than elsewhere in
Re:I'd rather have my privacy, thanks (Score:2)
Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.
I'd like to note, that I don't think I believe in absolute capitalism or anything silly like that. I just believe that standards of living are more or less going up everywhere. Obviously, I've won the metaphysical lottery, with being born and raised in north america. Canada is a pretty nice place to live. Would I be saying the same things if I were to be born in a developing country...who knows.
With a few percent of the population controlling the wealth since
Data collection on your representatives. (Score:3, Insightful)
However data collection on individuals is not necessarily a bad thing, especially if they are in a position of power.
e.g.
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/
wish there was a US version of that website (Score:1)
Re:wish there was a US version of that website (Score:2)
Privacy vs Databasing (Score:2, Interesting)
If there was some place I could opt-in for certain deals on groceries or whatever, I would sign up
IJ advertisement and Vogons (Score:1)
Other possible privacy problems (Score:1)
UK spam laws (Score:4, Interesting)
It also sells the information to amongst others Equifax [equifax.co.uk]. According to recent studies over those opposed to the way information is collected, over 1/3 of all Equifax records are inaccurate enough to adversely influence a credit decision.
I recently found out that for the past six years, even though I pay over $200 per month in local tax, Equifax didn't have that information on file. This meant that I was listed as having effectively avoided paying council tax for that period. I started to examine who was to take responsibility for this "oversight".
Well, the Data Protection Act [dataprotection.gov.uk] is very clear on this - no-one takes responsibility for the accuracy of the data. Not Equifax, not the local council, not even the people providing the information (or failing to provide the information). No-one. It is a veritable black hole of responsibility. A key point of the "Data Protection Act 1998" is that it is not there to protect the data subject, but to protect the data controller (yep, Equifax) from recourse by the data subject.
Who is the "data subject"? Well, that's YOU of course.
Agencies like Equifax are answerable to no-one and they have a lot of not quite so accurate information on you which they use to make influential decisions on how you live. They are the single best candidate (and best latter-day substitute) for the incompetent and overpaid bureacrat.
Re:UK spam laws (Score:2)
I've having a similar situation where just because I insisted on my legal rights, my former real estage agent put me down as a bad tenannt. Whilst it is the truth, it certainly isn't in the "public interest".
Truth is an absolute defence (in some jurisdications). What if they got it wrong? It think that may be actionable
Re:UK spam laws (Score:2)
And according to the DPA 1998, no-one has breached the Act because no-one is directly responsible.
You can "appeal" to the Information Commis
Make it criminal, not civil law.... (Score:2)
When a corporation's executive management faces jail time for violating an individual's rights as opposed to their insurance company paying out a settlement I think the potential for abuse would decline. Of course, there would also need to be serious oversight similar to that of the SEC (yeah yeah, I know: where were they with Enron?).
Seems like a very tiny step to me (Score:2)
I remember my family getting ads from Time-Life, Publishers Clearinghouse and others with highly customized content. Like nearly 30 years ago. Stuff like this:
Re:CUSTOM SPAM (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah, I know...boo hisss....but I couldn't help myself.
Re:CUSTOM SPAM (Score:1)
Before everyone finds photos of my house and comes to beat me up, at least let me say that we only send to people already on mailing lists 99% of the time. The only real junk mail I've sent was ironically from a guy in a pyramid scheme trying to sell people...mailing lists! He called to complain after not one person responded to his mail. I guess he was at the bottom