Ask HN: What's the worst that could happen? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: What's the worst that could happen?

8 pointstejaswiy3 comments

With this trend of sharing private data, say Facebook won the social network / identity war, what is the worst that can happen if they continue to share my data with websites? Ads, is one thing I can envision, but that isn't too bad is it? More relevant ads are alright. Less than honest employees snooping around in their databases and blackmailing their users? Possible, but long shot.

I'm aware that the government can track me with much more confidence, but with server / ISP logs, I think they're much more "dangerous" than some background FB personalization.

Other than people being offended by FB not asking them about sharing data, are there any real downsides to it?

View on HN

What's the worst thing that can happen? Insurance companies would love to have access to your social network data -- there is already strong research data showing a correlation between your friends and various risk factors. We can assume that governments already have access to the data, but there is a gradual drift to making this available to other corporate entities. We have the most to fear from commercial entities here.

Now, one could argue that through financial records and other online records, anyone from a private investigator on up would be able to determine everything about me given enough time. I grant this is probably true. The downside by sharing is that every large entity will know everything about me, with minimal effort.

I won't agree to share my information merely to gain a convenient service, in return for the data being mined. This sharing lowers the bar required for corporations to intrude into our identities, into who we are. And it's being performed en masse. In a sense, we're merely data points.

True, I can see Variable insurance premiums based on your likes / friends, it _is_ a scary prospect. I guess a similar problem applies to any form of insurance. I don't know if it's wrong to do that though, if it leads to lower insurance premiums to the rest of the world. Insurance companies already tend to do a real world equivalent of what you talk about, but at a much lower level.

For (2) and (3), Agreed again, but what does it matter if you're just a data point to Big Corp A? Do you really expect them to treat you as an individual even if they don't have any of your data?

Facebook taking control of the world is not really that bad. It's only uncomfortable.

It's similar to the Microsoft empire from a few years back. Windows knew everything about you and you were completely locked-in not being able to stop using it because you had all your apps there.

Now you have all your friends there.

From application developer point of view this is actually a good thing - you have a common platform to code for. And it triggers innovation as we don't have to reinvent the wheel - there is the default social network already, so let's build on top of it!

Of course it would be great to have a free, distributed, open source social network anyone would join and leave at any time (think: Diaspora). Just as it would have been so much better if it was Linux or BSD who gained the monopoly on desktops, not Windows.

But we survived then and we'll survive now.

And if Facebook starts being RELALY nasty, people will finally leave it for something more friendly, cooler or maybe just new.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com