Hacker News Reader

Comment by mgraczyk | Hacker News Reader

It's been ubiquitous for around 20 years now (Google started doing mass surveillance for display ads in the early 2000s) and nothing bad has happened, so yes that's my point.

If nothing bad happens for decades, and that is inconsistent with your model of danger, then the model is probably wrong

View on HN

Your argument boils down to "yes, someone has had a gun pointed at my head for quite some time now, but they haven't pulled the trigger yet so I don't see the problem."

No, I'm arguing that it's not actually a gun, and my evidence is that there are 2 billion "guns" that have been pointed at 2 billion people's heads for years, and nobody has been hurt.

It's more like a flashlight than a gun

> It's more like a flashlight than a gun

I disagree, and again, implore you to use your imagination. If private messages (not just yours but someone elses) were to suddenly be public or institutional knowledge, what damning things might happen? What influence might some have over others? What dynamics could or would shift as a result?

I'm comfortable making the claim that you aren't really thinking this through, at all, in any meaningful way.

What was the fallout last time this happened? Was it like pulling the triggers of guns pointed at people's heads?

The FTC press release is not talking about private messages, that is not the kind of data they are asking to protect. Private messages are already generally protected in the way the FTC is asking for.

If you don't think anything bad happens from personal data being accessed without one's consent, please reply to this comment and share:

1. Your full name

2. Your home address

3. Your social security number (if you're American)

4. Your mother's maiden name

If you're right, then you have nothing to worry about.

None of this data is included in the FTC report. They are not talking about this.

My full name is Michael Graczyk, I live in San Francisco, none of these companies know any more detail than that about the questions you asked

> none of these companies know any more detail than that about the questions you asked

I suspect you mean that you haven't provided these companies with these details. What reason do you have to think they don't know those details?

They don't know these details because they have never asked. It's not the sort of detail that would be useful for ads (except my home address)

Michael, I disagree with your point but I recognize your integrity. You just posted your name and city, and your HN profile shares more personal information.

I respect that you are willing to stand behind your claim. Best of success with your current venture.

> nothing bad has happened

ummm, WTF?

10x increase in teen suicide doesn't qualify as "bad"?

or repeated DOJ lawsuits against Facebook because their advertising practices result in highly effective racial discrimination?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com