←back to thread

1293 points rmason | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.228s | source
Show context
no_wizard ◴[] No.19325224[source]
Here's the kicker, which I think others have pointed out, but I want to say this succinctly:

First, to quote the article:

> The big gainer, interestingly, is under the same roof as Facebook. It's their co-owned Instagram

Now, to my point: The average person does not care about privacy, just the illusion of privacy (I suspect people reading this site intuitively know this. At some level, nearly everyone is in different ways, it turns out.)

Instagram provides that illusion by not injecting opinionated content into your feed (The most obvious example: you aren't seeing injected news stories in your Instagram feed, generally its only ads and people you follow, and the ads are marked)

Rest assured, they're getting their data's worth, maybe not the same way, but photos (particularly metadata on the photos that most smart phones, for instance, default collect) are just as (if not more so) valuable, not to mention there are still a myriad of other ways of collecting privacy intrusive data about users.

Hows about that?

(just to show my assertion is not completely unfounded, check out this survey:

https://www.pewinternet.org/2015/05/20/americans-views-about...

The survey says: 9 out of ten americans care deeply about privacy (particuarly around data privacy and collection)

Yet, our actions, even faced with the outright knowledge of those very things being actively and routinely violated by services, is not enough for people to leave platforms for good, simply, people shift between social media outlets, like those leaving Facebook over privacy concerns yet still continue to use Instagram, in fact, Instagram is projected to grow as noted in this article, in part because of people migrating away from Facebook)

replies(14): >>19325266 #>>19325342 #>>19325398 #>>19325416 #>>19325442 #>>19325469 #>>19325480 #>>19325515 #>>19325970 #>>19326097 #>>19326374 #>>19327063 #>>19328092 #>>19328119 #
dd36 ◴[] No.19325266[source]
I think they do actually care about privacy but are only ever offered illusion.

The problem really is lack of choice.

replies(4): >>19325314 #>>19325320 #>>19325493 #>>19325895 #
hanspeter ◴[] No.19325895[source]
If the problem was lack of choice, why do the large majority of all Facebook users never change their privacy settings?

Or why did hundreds of thousands of users actively choose to share their data with a random company called Cambridge Analytica?

The problem is not lack of choice. The problem is that people don't care.

replies(2): >>19326000 #>>19326011 #
CaptainZapp ◴[] No.19326011[source]
Or why did hundreds of thousands of users actively choose to share their data with a random company called Cambridge Analytica?

They certainly have never chosen to do so. You can accuse them of participating in some innane quiz, but it was exactly the big scandal that not only the participants' data, but also that of their friends was sucked and resold to Cambridge Analytica without their knowledge by the "researchers".

replies(1): >>19326379 #
1. hanspeter ◴[] No.19326379[source]
All participants have actively clicked a button to confirm that they would give Cambridge Analytica access to their profile data and data from their friends. The scandal was not that the data was collected without the participants knowledge. The scandal was that they used the data for something else, than what they initially had told the participants.