Corporate data abuse is being tempered by new European laws. Lobbying in the US prevented similar privacy protections.
Internet service providers like Comcast and AT&T and companies that use their connections, like Facebook and Google, lobbied members of Congress. Congress passed a law this year, signed by President Trump, that not only repealed the protections but also prohibited the F.C.C. from ever again imposing such safeguards. The same coalition of corporate interests succeeded in discouraging California from passing a state privacy law similar to the 2016 F.C.C. requirements.Can Europe Lead on Privacy?
The United States government has a lot of explaining to do. Why is it that American internet companies such as Facebook and Google are required to provide privacy protections when doing business with European consumers but are free to not provide such protections for Americans? Why is it that Americans’ best privacy hope is the secondary effect of interconnected networks rather than privacy protections designed for Americans? Why shouldn’t Americans also be given meaningful tools to protect their privacy?
Techmology ain’t your friend. We need more vigilance over what our lovely new tech toys are doing to us.
There must be better ways to design the tools we need and use. Perhaps the Center for Humane Technology has some ideas.
Silicon Valley is reckoning with having had a bad philosophical operating system. People in tech will say, “You told me, when I asked you what you wanted, that you wanted to go to the gym. That’s what you said. But then I handed you a box of doughnuts and you went for the doughnuts, so that must be what you really wanted.” The Facebook folks, that’s literally what they think. We offer people this other stuff, but then they always go for the outrage, or the autoplaying video, and that must be people’s most true preference.
I think the [traffic] metrics have created this whole illusion that what people are doing is what people want, when it’s really just what works in the moment, in that situation.
You saw this one coming right?
The Amazon Echo is a perfect way for the government to spy on citizens. Sure, Amazon rejects requests for the data but that doesn’t obviate the two big issues here.
The first is that the audio and data are recorded and kept. If it’s stored, even briefly, then hackers can get it. Especially state actors. The courts may yet force companies to give it up.
The second and larger issue is that we don’t have laws protecting the privacy of our data. We need regulations that keep up with changing technology. We need rules that favor citizens, not companies, and certainly not governements.
Bid for Access to Amazon Echo Audio in Murder Case Raises Privacy Concerns http://nyti.ms/2huPxwl
Make a great no mistake we don’t need in vase privacy busting tools to keep the world a safe place. It already is safer than it ever has been and this trend predates even the Internet.
What we do need is a world in which private activities and communications are secure. We need people to feel comfortable saying and doing what they need to on their phones and the Web without fear that it will be used against them. This will have far greater benefit to mankind and the free world than spy tech that invades your phone ever could.
NSO can say they’re trying to make the world a safer place, but they are also making the world a more surveilled place.”
The cyberarms industry typified by the NSO Group operates in a legal gray area, and it is often left to the companies to decide how far they are willing to dig into a target’s personal life and what governments they will do business with.
The only solution against this onslaught of freedom killing software and the surveillance state is actually the government. People have to write laws that forbid this type of software and associated technologies. That won’t completely prevent this type of invasive snooping but it will limit it and give people recourse to fight companies that profit from stealing our personal and private info.
How Spy Tech Firms Let Governments See Everything on a Smartphone http://nyti.ms/2cfXAZy
Another example of why health insurance and employment shouldn’t be tied together.
Employee wellness programs are mostly great, but ‘required’ participation is problematic. Requiring employees to provide private data and health info or fining them if they dont is not voluntary participant as required by the law.
Effectively employees required to give biometric info to participate removes consumer choice from the market place. Employees can’t move to other health plans which dont misuse their data without leaving their jobs.
This is good for corporations but not for people.
The Sticks and Carrots of Employee Wellness Programs http://nyti.ms/1KL0ttz
Kudos to Bobby Jindal for getting it right on privacy. License plate readers pose far greater harm to society than any law enforcement benefit they could possibly provide.
Of course private companies will get their hands on this data. In no world should it be ok for private companies to know where we are.
I can’t agree with the author’s conclusion that Cop Cams are necessary. I do agree with the concerns he has about the negative impact of using them.
One figure is telling. Less than 1% of police citizen interactions involve force. So we want to record all police citizen interactions to deal with the perceived problem of less than less than 1% of interaction in which for is used inappropriately.
Just because the technology to record these interactions exist doesn’t mean we should use it. There are other better ways to improve interactions between police and citizens.
The Lost Language of Privacy http://nyti.ms/1NBoaMD