Technology starting to scare me?

Wibbs

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I was driving home from work the other day when my phone rang. Four screens were telling me my wife was calling - the dashboard beside the speedometer, the centre console, my watch and the phone itself.


It was at that point I realised things have gone too far.

Nothing for it T, but to get rid of the wife.

El_Duderino 09

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.

Exactly this.

Do the technology skeptics wash their clothes by hand, walk or use horse and cart? Complain about young people using their phone to pay for things, but do you go to the bank to withdraw cash or do you use your card to withdraw from an ATM?

I presume ATMs are perfectly reasonable technology because you were brought up with them and they are normal to you. But anything newer than that is scary and unnecessary.

Interesting that these threads inevitably turn to bashing young people. Even when it was the technology I knew it was the young people.

Twenty Grand

ATMs? Don't make me laugh. Only used by people too lazy to queue up in a bank!

Awful technology, you completely miss the social interaction with the 20 people you're queueing with for 30 minutes and the chats with the bank teller who couldn't give a flying f*ck about your stories.

Of course I walk everywhere too. Can't be dealing with cars. Only for lazy fat people who've never done a bit of exercise :rolleyes:

Wibbs

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Exactly this.

Do the technology skeptics wash their clothes by hand, walk or use horse and cart? Complain about young people using their phone to pay for things, but do you go to the bank to withdraw cash or do you use your card to withdraw from an ATM?

I presume ATMs are perfectly reasonable technology because you were brought up with them and they are normal to you. But anything newer than that is scary and unnecessary.

Interesting that these threads inevitably turn to bashing young people. Even when it was the technology I knew it was the young people.

"Bashing young people?".

For a start "young people" are generally not the biggest consumers. Not too many twenty year olds buying new Beemers on tick. I'd bet the demographics that are the least consumerist are the young and the old. The demographic keeping Chinese factories running 24/7 are more likely to be those between 30 and 60. Though overall we're demonstrably consuming far more than people of any age 30 years ago and certain technologies are driving this.

The philosophies behind the tech are very old school. Marketing on steroids essentially. Something that came out of the interwebs, almost by mistake. The internet came outa nowhere for most, but was pretty widespread pretty quickly and most of all it was free, so when companies wanted to make money from it, users didn't want to bite. Why pay for something on one site you can get for free on another? So turn the "customer" into the "product" and make money, vast amounts of money from that. As I said Google's entire business model. Facebook similarly. Much of social media in general. Conveniences like Alexa, Siri, cashless payments and the like are tools serving the same master(just as the introduction of the credit card a few decades ago drove a consumer and credit boom).

The level of commercial surveillance the average first world citizen is under would and should have us in fits of WTF?s if it were government agencies involved. Some of the more tinfoil hat persuasion freak out at the idea the CIA are monitoring phone and web traffic, yet most of the same people happily agree to let Google et al do the same, if not more as people willingly give as much info about themselves as possible. And that's wth today's tech. Imagine the level of data gathering in ten or twenty years time. The genie is already out of the bottle and won't be so easy to stuff it back into it.

Though IMHO it's the "young people" who are a little more suspicious of the whole thing. The middle aged tend to go along with it, largely thinking it's convenient future tech.

Atoms for Peace

Google are apparently moving into the old stasi HQ in Berlin, seems like a perfect fit.


Posted from my android phone!:(

Frunchy

Technological singularity could happen within our lifetimes. No one can predict what will happen then....

El_Duderino 09

Twenty Grand wrote: »

ATMs? Don't make me laugh. Only used by people too lazy to queue up in a bank!

Awful technology, you completely miss the social interaction with the 20 people you're queueing with for 30 minutes and the chats with the bank teller who couldn't give a flying f*ck about your stories.

Of course I walk everywhere too. Can't be dealing with cars. Only for lazy fat people who've never done a bit of exercise :rolleyes:

Fact. You use cash? Probably because you’re too lazy to carry around actual goods to barter.

And then there’s the fact that we’re being forced to use technology like optional extras such as intelligent cruise control. Lol

No only is that technology an optional extra, it’s also a tech you can simply choose not to use.

Canis Lupus

Patww79 wrote: »

Where do you think people keep their phones? That's one of the most stupid things I've read on here in a long time. If you're going to be a massive luddite then at least try to form something coherent.

It's on their wrist nowadays grandpa

lertsnim

Using Google Pay is laziness? Right then.

OldMrBrennan83

Canis Lupus wrote: »

It's on their wrist nowadays grandpa

Lazy! Pay for everything from a coin purse.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Dylan Juicy WheatMGS wrote: »

the sooner cash is ceased to be used the better.

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.

Wibbs

I'd be with the Germans on that score. Today the sheer quantity of information on groups and individuals being tracked and stored is scary. Or should be. If the will was there to track you reading this and you're an average John or Jane O'Citizen using your smartphone, loyalty card, Google/Apple Pay, GPS equipped and online car and you're on social media, what companies and other entities they sell that information to is more than a bit Orwellian. Indeed he couldn't have begun to imagine the degree of it.

They know where you are and where you've been, the numbers you've called and texted and from where and when, what you bought where and when and how often, what your credit rating is, where you work, how much you earn, where you live(and have a picture of your gaff), what you drive, what you eat and drink, where you go on holiday, who your friends, partners, affiliations, political leanings are, what you look like, what you listen to and read and if you paid to do the whole DNA ancestry scam(the largest of which is linked to google) they have your actual genetic how to build you manual. Think about that for a moment. Multi billion euro funded multinational unelected entities with interactive listening and observing devices in the pocket or wrist or sitting on the desk as a handy assistant of most of the world's population.

And that's today. With today's tech. And with little "ah here, hang on" from governments(though the EU is far better on this score than say the Americans). Indeed quite a few governments would only love to sift through this data mountain and if it comes to the bottom line every one of those corporations will let them. Look at China with its social credit system. A fair number are asking WTF about that and how totalitarian it is and could be. Yet we are already building the same social credit system elsewhere and we're signing up to it in droves. The Chinese are just being more obvious about it.

Like I say, that's today's tech. We couldn't do this to nearly this level even ten, fifteen years ago. What's in store for us in fifteen years time if the pace of the surveillance continues as it has? You hear talk of AI coming and taking over, I'll bet now if AI is a possibility, then it'll spring forth as an emergent behaviour from these massive entities. An AI that will know practically everything about every man, woman and child on the planet.

Bubbaclaus

Why do people care if a company knows that you buy your milk in tesco. Seriously?

TheValeyard

erica74 wrote: »

I've always been interested in the raktajino myself:cool: it always sounded like a Klingon frappucino to me:pac:

Ahhhh good auld Raktajino

wexie

Wibbs wrote: »

You hear talk of AI coming and taking over, I'll bet now if AI is a possibility, then it'll spring forth as an emergent behaviour from these massive entities. An AI that will know practically everything about every man, woman and child on the planet.

Yeah but it's okay Wibbs, cause it'll be a friendly happy and helpful AI. Kinda like an omnipotent and omniscient being that wants nothing but the best for all of us....

:rolleyes:

Pinch Flat

I’m still waiting for personal hover boards....

Shenshen

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.

Not the full picture for Germany - they have a very well-functioning banking system, and had that for decades. Payment for orders is usually made by bank order. They also had something called an EC card (essentially a debit card) since the mid-80s, and they were accepted in most shops well before any credit cards were.

As a consequence, Germans never really saw any benefit in paying money to have a credit card, and extra money in interest. Not so much about some sort of privacy concern.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Shenshen wrote: »

Not the full picture for Germany - they have a very well-functioning banking system, and had that for decades. Payment for orders is usually made by bank order. They also had something called an EC card (essentially a debit card) since the mid-80s, and they were accepted in most shops well before any credit cards were.

As a consequence, Germans never really saw any benefit in paying money to have a credit card, and extra money in interest. Not so much about some sort of privacy concern.

According to CNN:

Germans have not switched to credit and debit cards as quickly as people in other developed economies, preferring instead to use banknotes and coins for their purchases.

The average German wallet contains €107 ($132) in cash, according to the Bundesbank. That's one of the highest amounts in Europe, and far more than the roughly €30 ($37) typically found in French and Belgian wallets.

Germans told the central bank that there were a few reasons why cash had remained popular for so long.

Many said it's a more private way to pay, and they believe it's faster.

The article also reports that 2017 was the first year when cash transactions accounted for less than half (48%) of all transactions in Germany. Other European countries have far more cashless transactions.

screamer

Indeed....if we keep on this track we'll be the robots.....no brains, no thought process, just plug into whatever and veg out. Technology is making us more stupid, less capable. Kids can't add without calculators, no one knows a phone number without using their contact lists and as for conversation or meeting people....sure what would they do without tinder? Smart devices.....stupid people

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Why do people care if a company knows that you buy your milk in tesco. Seriously?

Imagine the vaunted "cashless society" comes about, and there's no option to pay for anything in cash anymore.

Want to buy a sex toy? Want to pay for an abortion? Want to buy illegal drugs? Want to pay for a lap dance? Want to gamble on a poker game? Want to pay a psychiatrist?

Are you happy for Google, or your credit card company, or your bank, to have a permanent record of these kinds of payments?

Arthur Daley

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

Qwant claims not to track you, it is a French based alternative.
On the extinction of species thread yesterday someone mentioned ecosia which looks pretty good. They use profits to plant trees.

There are others, so there could be a backlash. one cookie at a time.

The Tetrarch

Patww79 wrote: »

Well if you're just going to make stuff up. Anyway yeah, we won't agree and each of us thinks the other is taking out of their hole, so what's the point. Just don't add things to my posts when you quote then in future thanks.

I was at a bus stop on the Stillorgan Road, me and nine others waiting for a bus.
Nine of them out of a sample of nine were looking at their phones.

Arthur Daley

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

Imagine the vaunted "cashless society" comes about, and there's no option to pay for anything in cash anymore.

Aye. It is amazing how some people are completely willing to kettle themselves into total dependance on electrical forms of payment.

Nothing better than holding folding.

Shenshen

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

According to CNN:



The article also reports that 2017 was the first year when cash transactions accounted for less than half (48%) of all transactions in Germany. Other European countries have far more cashless transactions.

As I said, historically there had been no need for credit cards, s the German banking system offered cheaper and more secure alternatives.
Consequently, people are very slow moving to credit cards, now that privacy is becoming a concern for them.

In the UK for example, it was already perfectly normal to have credit cards in the 80s, well before people started becoming suspicious about the banks using their data. So naturally, there are more businesses tailored to this.

Try buying from a German vendor on ebay and paying via PayPal - many will reject and will ask you for a bank transfer. That's the way the infrastructure is set up in Germany.
Credit cards cost money, bank transfers are free.

Shenshen

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

Imagine the vaunted "cashless society" comes about, and there's no option to pay for anything in cash anymore.

Want to buy a sex toy? Want to pay for an abortion? Want to buy illegal drugs? Want to pay for a lap dance? Want to gamble on a poker game? Want to pay a psychiatrist?

Are you happy for Google, or your credit card company, or your bank, to have a permanent record of these kinds of payments?

Get a pre-paid card.
It's really not that hard to avoid traceability.

Bubbaclaus

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

Imagine the vaunted "cashless society" comes about, and there's no option to pay for anything in cash anymore.

Want to buy a sex toy? Want to pay for an abortion? Want to buy illegal drugs? Want to pay for a lap dance? Want to gamble on a poker game? Want to pay a psychiatrist?

Are you happy for Google, or your credit card company, or your bank, to have a permanent record of these kinds of payments?

Other than buying the illegal drugs I don't see any issues there? Everything else you mentioned is perfectly legal and normal. Are you afraid your bank will laugh at your purchases or something?

wexie

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

Imagine the vaunted "cashless society" comes about, and there's no option to pay for anything in cash anymore.

Want to buy a sex toy?
Want to pay for an abortion?
Want to buy illegal drugs?
Want to pay for a lap dance?
Want to gamble on a poker game?
Want to pay a psychiatrist?

Are you happy for Google, or your credit card company, or your bank, to have a permanent record of these kinds of payments?

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?

Gonad

https://youtu.be/Ra3fv8gl6NE

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Other than buying the illegal drugs I don't see any issues there? Everything else you mentioned is perfectly legal and normal. Are you afraid your bank will laugh at your purchases or something?

The bank could well take your penchant for gambling into account when you apply for a mortgage. Your wife, if she files for divorce, can cite those lap dances in court and use them against you. Your life insurance company may be interested in those payments to psychiatrists. There are a great many things that it's legal to do, but that can affect you adversely.

wexie

Gonad wrote: »

https://youtu.be/Ra3fv8gl6NE

I think maybe some people might take this a little more serious

(nothing against Elon Musk btw but he doesn't quite measure up against this man)

bodhrandude

Dylan Juicy WheatMGS wrote: »

the sooner cash is ceased to be used the better. I always hiss when I enter a shop that has no card machine or a ridiculous extra charge for “under X amount”. I’m also pretty sure I read somewhere that’s illegal.

My local corner shop in Salthill will only let you use a card if you spend 10 Euro worth of groceries, ridiculous if you only want a packet of skins and a box of teabags.

Bubbaclaus

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

The bank could well take your penchant for gambling into account when you apply for a mortgage. Your wife, if she files for divorce, can cite those lap dances in court and use them against you. Your life insurance company may be interested in those payments to psychiatrists. There are a great many things that it's legal to do, but that can affect you adversely.

The bank have every right to take gambling into account before lending you hundreds of thousands, they already do that. In the application they will ask you if you gamble and if you lie it's fraud.

The wife has every right to cite those lap dances in a divorce court proceeding. Unless you want to withhold evidence?

You need to fully disclose everything when getting life insurance anyway, or else you are engaged in fraud.

This is basically trying to hide things you are ashamed about or else upset that you can't con the system.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

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?

Oh, I entirely accept that Google tracks people in numerous ways, some of which are less than obvious. But someone can still go to an abortion clinic, leave her phone at home, and pay in cash. We still have some semblance of privacy left, if we choose to exercise it. An entirely cashless society, where every single transaction you ever make can be traced back to you, would eradicate much of that privacy. It would be of great benefit to governments, financial institutions, tech companies, Revenue, and law enforcement -- which is why governments and companies relentlessly advocate for it.

Shenshen

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

The bank could well take your penchant for gambling into account when you apply for a mortgage. Your wife, if she files for divorce, can cite those lap dances in court and use them against you. Your life insurance company may be interested in those payments to psychiatrists. There are a great many things that it's legal to do, but that can affect you adversely.

I remember a while ago someone posting on boards about being declined for a loan because they had organised a lotto syndicate at work and were playing online for all of them.

So this is in fact already a thing.
And while I hope that the lotto syndicate situation did resolve itself, I also can't claim that I dislike the idea of potential gambling addictions being taken into account when setting up credit ratings.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

The bank have every right to take gambling into account before lending you hundreds of thousands, they already do that. In the application they will ask you if you gamble and if you lie it's fraud.

The wife has every right to cite those lap dances in a divorce court proceeding. Unless you want to withhold evidence?

You need to fully disclose everything when getting life insurance anyway, or else you are engaged in fraud.

This is basically trying to hide things you are ashamed about or else upset that you can't con the system.

You're seemingly happy to disclose absolutely everything about yourself to anyone who asks. Most people, however, don't want potentially compromising visits to strip clubs, abortion clinics, poker games, psychiatrists' offices, etc., logged as part of their permanent record to be dragged up or subpoenaed and used against them at any point. Paying in cash renders the transaction invisible, or at least gives them plausible deniability.

wexie

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

Oh, I entirely accept that Google tracks people in numerous ways, some of which are less than obvious. But someone can still go to an abortion clinic, leave her phone at home, and pay in cash. We still have some semblance of privacy left, if we choose to exercise it. An entirely cashless society, where every single transaction you ever make can be traced back to you, would eradicate much of that privacy. It would be of great benefit to governments, financial institutions, tech companies, Revenue, and law enforcement -- which is why governments and companies relentlessly advocate for it.

Yeah, perhaps. I think a lot will end up depending on who gets access to what data based on which requirements.

Interesting (and pretty disturbing) TEDtalk here on artificial intelligence and it's current (military) uses in combat and intelligence gathering and surveillance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrNs0M77Pd4

the future is here already, and it's pretty scary....

El_Duderino 09

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.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Shenshen wrote: »

I remember a while ago someone posting on boards about being declined for a loan because they had organised a lotto syndicate at work and were playing online for all of them.

So this is in fact already a thing.
And while I hope that the lotto syndicate situation did resolve itself, I also can't claim that I dislike the idea of potential gambling addictions being taken into account when setting up credit ratings.

Well, there's a big difference between organizing a Lotto syndicate at work and being a gambling addict -- but yes, if the bank sees a lot of electronic payments to the National Lottery, that is exactly what they will conclude.

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.

SterlingArcher

MadYaker wrote: »

Am I the only one who is becoming scared of technology?

You ever tried using voice to text. Have the conversation look all broken and not make sense. How funny it looks.

Then have you ever been in a loud enough crowded city centre discussing something at pace with someone, only to have it pop up in your recommendations.

Ai development is moving at considerable speed, Google has made no secret of the fact it is creating Ai based on the hive mind of the People using Google. There are no restrictions, there is no legislation, there are no safe guards in place.

When the inevitable Ai introduction rolls out with I phone like mass appeal of biological integration(again Google's active vision, not fiction). Ai unintentionally will answer for us one of the greatest questions humans have pondered about their existence. What is/was the human soul. forget money or bank cards. You'll be unwittingly paying the highest price imaginable.

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?