Hacker News Reader

Comment by that_guy_iain | Hacker News Reader

He doesn't need to prove his anecdote but prove that big tech is bad. The whole "I got recommended something that was actually related to me so I'm avoid big tech for the safety of my children" implies that him being recommended something that was actually related to him was dangerous.

This is almost the same as "I was talking to someone about wanting to buy a gaming PC then I saw ads for gaming PC. They must be listening to my conversations". Nah, some people got told to figure out the patterns of people who go on to buy a gaming PC and someone figured it out. Just like how LinkedIn, TikTok, Instagram, figure out people you may know because you share a data point or two.

View on HN

i think the point was that it is scary to know that you are getting stuff recommended based on location. that means that you can assume that more recommendations are from nearby which implicitly reveals the location of the people in the videos.

having my kids be seen 100 random viewers world wide is one thing, having the same video shared with all my neighbors is quite another.

Yes, and also that even if you make 'reasonable efforts' to stay off the radar, algorithms will build a shadow profile of you from other people's interactions with you they track. For example, if you send an email to a gmail account, google has access to that text you wrote even if they don't have you on gmail.

So your neighbours can see your kid in Person but seeing a video of them is off? You don't want a friendly neighbourly vibe

there is a big difference between seeing something, and having a permanent recording of it. also, only a few people see what the kids are doing at any given time, and none of them see anything happening at home except the friends coming over. so when something embarrassing happens the difference is between a few neighbors seeing it vs all of them.

there are enough examples of nosy neighbors in the US calling the police on things they don't like. look up free range parenting right here on hackernews.

noone is going to bother about a few kids filming themselves spraying graffiti at the local park, except some people who live at the park.

if an algorithm amplifies local activities to everyone around, then the wrong kind of people will find out.

it's the very definition of gossip that is being facilitated here. the assumption that when something is interesting for a pew people, it's probably interesting for everyone else in the area.

it was probably a similar algorithm that motivated people to turn into lynch-mobs in some places in asia.

it's likely this kind of realization that spooked the OP.

> if an algorithm amplifies local activities to everyone around, then the wrong kind of people will find out.

Who are the wrong kind of people?

the kind that call the police when they see kids playing unsupervised in the park.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31097578

Fair point

Reply on news.ycombinator.com