Most active commenters
  • gerdesj(4)
  • ipaddr(4)
  • xanderlewis(4)
  • genewitch(3)

←back to thread

747 points empressplay | 39 comments | | HN request time: 2.829s | source | bottom
1. joshdavham ◴[] No.42071299[source]
> "Most people can say, 'Why is it a big deal for a teenager now to have their data [on TikTok]?' Well in five years, in 10 years, that teenager will be a young adult, will be engaged in different activities around the world,"

I’m technically Gen-Z (but just barely) and this is something that really worries me. It’s become increasingly normal in recent times to share absolutely everything online but I’ve got a pretty grim feeling that this isn’t gonna end well. People don’t realize that the AI’s being trained on your data today will act as an internet history that you can never delete.

replies(6): >>42071406 #>>42071493 #>>42071740 #>>42072003 #>>42073437 #>>42073601 #
2. DilutedMetrics ◴[] No.42071406[source]
Full circle from early Facebook and Twitter over sharing.
replies(2): >>42071746 #>>42072302 #
3. gerdesj ◴[] No.42071493[source]
"As ye sow, so ye shall reap"! errm, soz for the Biblical ref.

If everyone is spewing (sorry ... sharing) pics on TikTok, X and co then you won't stand out from the crowd. Unless those pics involve something too controversial.

I have an internet history that stretches back to Compuserve and I've always used my real name, which may or may not have been a good idea. Many years ago I decided not to give myself a silly pseudonym because I thought it would be futile and counter productive.

  Cheers
  wonky231
replies(2): >>42071649 #>>42071743 #
4. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.42071649[source]
> If everyone is spewing (sorry ... sharing) pics on TikTok, X and co then you won't stand out from the crowd

You’re assuming people are consistent. You may have been photographed doing the same thing as all your peers, the fact that your photo can be highlighted unfavourable is ample ammo for proven lines of character attacks.

replies(2): >>42071757 #>>42071865 #
5. ipaddr ◴[] No.42071740[source]
I wouldn't worry about it the truth is the internet forgets quickly. Important popular things disappear quicker than you expect. User data and logs exponentially becomes less valuable as time goes out. Know you are at McDonalds now is much more valuable then that you visited 10 years ago and being able to connect this data becomes difficult when devices switch. Video from 2005's is generally not easily consumable because of format changes and quality from a few years ago makes older video painful to watch. Even facebook starts forgetting data you upload.. stops being searchable after a few years.
replies(3): >>42071811 #>>42071920 #>>42081038 #
6. drawkward ◴[] No.42071743[source]
So which of these is your real name?

Gerdesj? Or Wonky231?

replies(1): >>42071882 #
7. dystnitem4r3 ◴[] No.42071746[source]
As someone who actually didn't participate in the facebook generation (I was a straight edge Millenial who started college at the tail of the Gen X generation), I do not envy anyone trying to live in modern western society without their generation's social media of choice. The few of us 'counterflow' cannot win against the tides as long as we remain part of the larger society. At best we eke out livings generally disadvantaged compared to our brethren with social media presences and all the drama that goes with it. A few of us may get opportunities from those rare outliers in positions to make a call or introduce you to a friend of a friend. But make of the rest of us simply become one of the unspoken masses, just like say the people in Slab City, or those old rock hounds who used to live in Quartzite, AZ (now some weird mass of RV park and bedroom community for Phoenix, as I understand it.)

My point, winding as it may seem, is that this generations kids are bound to their social mediums just like the radio and then television generations were to theirs, for mainstream culture, and like the Beatniks, Hippies, Progressives(I'm not sure of the proper term here, but the non-internet groups of the 80s-00s, LGBTQA movement, the BDSM movement, etc) for the outliers. There are plenty of other subcultures out there that have waxed and waned as well, some of them crossing other boundaries, like the religious or politcal gaps in this country.

But for many of us that leaves us as the odd person out. Not being into the right hobbies or social activities or just having the wrong values and you soon find yourself distanced from those around you. The internet can give that back to you or help take it away, but in the long term the dossiers on each of us that being online produce is far less damaging than the lack of in-person connections many of us(not I) gain from social networks even as we give up our privacy and our opportunities for future dissent against the status quo, something that Eastern and Western societies alike are rapidly barreling towards an ultimatum on.

Assuming you're not YOLOing it, what will you give up for your life now, versus the lives you want to leave you to your descendants, or if you're not planning on your own and not a selfish jerk, for other people's descendants?

Footnote: This comment was written from an American point of view, although much of it still applies to our Canadian cousins and European/Australian brethren.

replies(1): >>42073404 #
8. ipaddr ◴[] No.42071757{3}[source]
People can attack character over anything.
replies(1): >>42071773 #
9. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.42071773{4}[source]
Just saying that I have seen zero evidence over the last 10 years of anyone getting more tolerant of others being, in their opinion, stupid online.
10. nirav72 ◴[] No.42071811[source]
But the fact that you prefer McDonald’s will not forgotten and will be part of some data profile on you , sold and resold by data brokers.
replies(2): >>42071836 #>>42071855 #
11. BOOSTERHIDROGEN ◴[] No.42071836{3}[source]
and saved into weights.
12. xanderlewis ◴[] No.42071855{3}[source]
Sorry, but who cares?
replies(2): >>42072860 #>>42073240 #
13. gerdesj ◴[] No.42071865{3}[source]
"You’re assuming people are consistent."

People are consistent but the media is not and the audience is far bigger than anyone can imagine. This is the Brave New World. We all know things are changing rather fast. Back in the day, I'd write a letter to someone - yes pen and ink (obviously being modern, I had a cartridge pen). Nowadays I pick up the phone and shout at the little twit who tries to hide behind email. OK we had phones back in the day but a call to say Australia (I'm in the UK) had a 2 second latency and a price in the £ per minute range. I remember the handover of pulse to tone dialing.

Nowadays we have an embarrassing array of communication methods and forums to chat and shout in and be heard all around the world (should anyone care to listen).

Yes you can be picked out and I suggest you be a little careful there but this is the world that we find ourselves within.

I was forced to read 1984 in 1984 when I was a lad. We also had Animal Farm and Brave New World on the reading and discussion list at school that year.

My doorbell looks at you (1)

  Cheers
  Noddy871

  (1) It is on a VLAN that can't see the internet and Home Assistant looks at my doorbell
14. gerdesj ◴[] No.42071882{3}[source]
My real name is knobbly223
replies(1): >>42082454 #
15. gruez ◴[] No.42071920[source]
What about 10 years from now, it came out that some politician liked (or "engaged with) a bunch of racist videos when he was a kid?
replies(2): >>42073065 #>>42073191 #
16. cjf101 ◴[] No.42072003[source]
One possible saving grace for Z is that, due to how expensive it is to keep around, video will probably disappear much more readily than text and photos.
17. immibis ◴[] No.42072302[source]
Why is the other child comment of this one - the one saying they can't imagine growing up while boycotting social media - deleted?
18. A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[] No.42072860{4}[source]
This is the fascinating question, because people who would normally respond on 'who cares' question, are also the ones, who know full well that even participation in an online forum is effectively builds up their profile. I am beyond redemption so I am their avatar.
replies(1): >>42073127 #
19. ipaddr ◴[] No.42073065{3}[source]
That would make the politician 25 or younger. Easy to pivot. Now 20 years would put the person at 35. You could survive a crack addition in your teens 20 years later if that came out.

But evidence starts disappearing. 20 bad articles about you in 5 years 10 might survive in 10 years maybe 2 might survive.

replies(1): >>42073194 #
20. xanderlewis ◴[] No.42073127{5}[source]
> I am beyond redemption so I am their avatar.

I have no idea what that sentence means.

I also have no idea why I should care that someone knows I like to go to McDonald’s.

replies(1): >>42073447 #
21. randomdata ◴[] No.42073191{3}[source]
What if this year it came out that a politician falsified business records and was criminally convicted for it? Why you'd make him President, of course!

There was certainly a fad when social media was new to get all worked up about finding out about something someone did in the past, where people were even losing their shit over something that would normally be innocuous like a photo of a teacher enjoying a beer at a party. But, I think we're kind of over it at this point. Fashion trends don't last forever.

replies(1): >>42073439 #
22. emptiestplace ◴[] No.42073404{3}[source]
I think you are significantly over-valuing what you are hypothetically missing out on.
replies(2): >>42074309 #>>42074330 #
23. Aurornis ◴[] No.42073437[source]
> It’s become increasingly normal in recent times to share absolutely everything online

It certainly feels that way when you pull up a social media feed

However, the majority of people I interact with (all ages) don't post frequently or at all.

It's 10% of the users posting 90% of the content, including over-sharing. It only looks normal because they're so dominant in the feed that you don't realize who's missing.

replies(1): >>42080993 #
24. genewitch ◴[] No.42073439{4}[source]
JD Vance had college pictures of him plastered on the news, so i am not sure what your yardstick's for measuring how "over it" we are as a society.
replies(2): >>42073612 #>>42073970 #
25. genewitch ◴[] No.42073447{6}[source]
Well, when the transplant committee uses it (your data) to triage your new heart or whatever
replies(1): >>42073863 #
26. aprilthird2021 ◴[] No.42073601[source]
We are lucky who live in America with free speech. I read an article the other day where a woman in Israel was kicked out of school, arrested and imprisoned for months without charge, and basically had her entire career and life ruined for social media posts because that country doesn't have the freedom of speech we often take for granted.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/magazine/israel-free-spee...

- How 4 Instagram posts ruined her life

replies(1): >>42074660 #
27. randomdata ◴[] No.42073612{5}[source]
Certainly once the elderly (those who follow the news) start to latch onto a fashion trend, it is definitely over.
28. xanderlewis ◴[] No.42073863{7}[source]
I’d be more worried if that was how it worked. But it isn’t — at least not where I live.
replies(2): >>42074361 #>>42090479 #
29. ipaddr ◴[] No.42073970{5}[source]
The news cycle at that level churns on anything and everything will come out. Are you comfortable with them interviewing old neighbors or people who went to the same school but didn't know you? At that level online activities are my least concern, old girlfriends or work colleagues or ex friends can spread the most impactful dirt. When material doesn't exist they just throw dirt to see what sticks.

You wouldn't have that problem. Try looking someone up these days in Google and you soon discover everything lives in walled in gardens like Facebook or instagram or iCloud or Snapchat or telegram.

30. nerdponx ◴[] No.42074309{4}[source]
Try telling that to a teenager.
31. sethammons ◴[] No.42074330{4}[source]
In my (very rural) area, you literally will not attract clients unless you are on Facebook or have a personal connection. This includes basic services like well service, septic service, tree service, etc. I had to have my wife use her account to find these companies. Apparently nobody has a real website. This is in the US.
32. sethammons ◴[] No.42074361{8}[source]
Yet. All signs point to its inevitability.
33. Tcehrarzy ◴[] No.42074660[source]
I am scared by this article and decide keep remain silent on social media.
34. 8n4vidtmkvmk ◴[] No.42080993[source]
I'm worried about the 1 or 2 posts where I said something stupid, but someone tied everything to everything else I've ever said, and it comes back to bite me. It doesn't take much to ruin a person.
35. 8n4vidtmkvmk ◴[] No.42081038[source]
I think the exact opposite. It's becoming easier and easier to crunch all that data. Let the AIs build up a perfect model of each individual human. No one needs to sit through and watch all that video content. And video formats are very much a non-issue, even if it's a pixelated mess, GenAI is very good at making sense of that.

The more data there is on you, the easier it'll be to fingerprint you in the future. Google photos can recognize me as a baby. Even I can't tell myself apart from my brother.

36. gerdesj ◴[] No.42082454{4}[source]
One of my g-g-g-g-grandads was called Joz Gerder. His boy was originally called Johann Henrich Gerder. I am obviously an immigrant!

Joz rocked up to the UK from Germany and married someone - records unavailable for birth and death dates, let alone anything else. John Henry (as he became) has dates: ca 1819-1851 (possibly 32 years old). It is thought that he died from "lacerated wounds" after punching a window and injuring his hand during a drunken brawl.

I can go back 14 generations on some branches (thickets really, not a tree!) of the family. I'm not only a German immigrant but also Cornish, Devonian, Cumbrian, various flavours of Scottish and obviously Irish (both Northern and the Republic).

Anyway, that should give you a clue as to my real name!

37. genewitch ◴[] No.42090479{8}[source]
I waited a while to reply to see if anyone else had anything to say about this. What jurisdiction doesn't triage heart transplants? Someone who eats $3,000/yr at mcdonalds vs someone who eats $50/yr at mcdonalds would be information pertinent to triage, wouldn't it? Even if you suppose that all human life is equal, then the amount of time a life is extended with a transplant matters, and the $50/yr person will probably (in the statistical sense) live longer than the other, all other things equal.

Maybe the committees don't "action" on this information because they don't have it, but it would be very silly to not use this information. I'd be curious what sort of triage wouldn't use this information. First-come first-serve?

if your goal is to maximize the length of human lives, that is, to put donor hearts to the maximum use for value, you'd have to use information like this!

replies(1): >>42109992 #
38. xanderlewis ◴[] No.42109992{9}[source]
What jurisdiction does? Seriously, can you name one? Is that how it works in the US?
replies(1): >>42110116 #
39. A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[] No.42110116{10}[source]
I am not a doctor, but if the test is whether your diet could become a factor then you do not have to look further than heart transplant waiting list criteria[1][2]. For example, please note that 'morbid obesity' is noted as a relative contraindication. McD enjoyers are not known for being fit ( I should know ).

I personally think you are asking the wrong question here.

[1]https://www.upmc.com/services/transplant/heart/process/waiti... [2]https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/transplant/referring-physici...