10-03-2021 05:10 AM - edited 10-03-2021 05:14 AM
How much is too much?
3.6M views 1 year agoHarvard professor Shoshana Zuboff wrote a monumental book about the new economic order that is alarming. "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism," reveals how the biggest tech companies deal with our data. How do we regain control of our data? What is surveillance capitalism? In this documentary, Zuboff takes the lid off Google and Facebook and reveals a merciless form of capitalism in which no natural resources, but the citizen itself, serves as a raw material. How can citizens regain control of their data?===================================================================================90K views 1 year agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL4bz3QXWEo
When should enough have been enough? The part (at 7:30) about a woman being pregnant and a supermarket chain knowing before she did is an eye opener. Shoulld be a brain opener too.
Interestingly, one of our valued regulars posted something similar some time back.
Pokemon Go an Invasion of Privacyon 07-24-2016 12:48 PM
@icyfroth wrote:
Film director Oliver Stone has says Pokémon Go is a “new level of invasion” of privacy that could lead to “totalitarianism”.
Oliver Stone has a history of taking on the establishment, and questioning historical and social narratives that society has been conditioned to accept as truth.
While promoting his new movie about NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden at Comic-Con International, the hollywood filmmaker was asked about security concerns associated with Pokémon Go.
Stone noted that companies were actually using the game to carry out“surveillance capitalism” by monitoring people’s behaviour.
Stone said…
“It’s not funny. What’s happening is a new level of invasion.
“The profits are enormous here for places like Google. They’ve invested a huge amount of money in data mining what you are buying, what you like, your behaviour.
“It’s what some people call surveillance capitalism.”
I'm surprised that more folks didn't post on her thread. Don't we care?
on 12-03-2021 05:52 PM
on 12-03-2021 05:57 PM
12-03-2021 05:58 PM - edited 12-03-2021 05:59 PM
@bright.ton42 wrote:The people who do the mocking and the sneering are usually those folks you just can't trust.
Yes there are a heap of untrustworthy people around here.
Yep 0000 9737. No wonder!
on 12-03-2021 05:59 PM
on 12-03-2021 06:09 PM
Looking at the comments in response to Shoshana's lectures, I can see that many people are concerned about where we're heading. It's obvious that this highly intelligent and moral woman cares about the direction of society.
People like her IMO are unique!
3.6M views 1 year agoHarvard professor Shoshana Zuboff wrote a monumental book about the new economic order that is alarming. "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism," reveals how the biggest tech companies deal with our data. How do we regain control of our data? What is surveillance capitalism? In this documentary, Zuboff takes the lid off Google and Facebook and reveals a merciless form of capitalism in which no natural resources, but the citizen itself, serves as a raw material. How can citizens regain control of their data?===================================================================================90K views 1 year agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL4bz3QXWEo
When should enough have been enough? The part (at 7:30) about a woman being pregnant and a supermarket chain knowing before she did is an eye opener. should be a brain opener too.
Interestingly, one of our valued regulars posted something similar some time back.
Pokemon Go an Invasion of Privacyon 07-24-2016 12:48 PM
@icyfroth wrote:
Film director Oliver Stone has says Pokémon Go is a “new level of invasion” of privacy that could lead to “totalitarianism”.
Oliver Stone has a history of taking on the establishment, and questioning historical and social narratives that society has been conditioned to accept as truth.
While promoting his new movie about NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden at Comic-Con International, the hollywood filmmaker was asked about security concerns associated with Pokémon Go.
Stone noted that companies were actually using the game to carry out“surveillance capitalism” by monitoring people’s behaviour.
Stone said…
“It’s not funny. What’s happening is a new level of invasion.
“The profits are enormous here for places like Google. They’ve invested a huge amount of money in data mining what you are buying, what you like, your behaviour.
“It’s what some people call surveillance capitalism.”
Thanks to icyfroth I learnt something new. I had no idea about the sinister aspect of this game.
People like icyfroth, I don't always agree with on certain issues. But their presence is cherished. For those wanting to engage in serious discussions about things that matter and learn a few, it needs to be noted that the absences of these people is the ruination of a good online discussion forum.
on 12-03-2021 06:20 PM
What - it's a case of didn't work the first time - so let's do it again - and again - and again.
on 12-03-2021 07:19 PM
I thought that this thread was about privacy, and how trading information about one's private life may impact on the degree to which one is expected to maintain any semblance of privacy.
I did not expect this to be about vaccination (to which I conclude you are referring with your mention of health-freedom) or about Daniel Andrews and your comparison of him to a totalitarian tyrant.
For the record, I'm not a Dan Andrews fan in particular. That's all I'll say about that.
In fact, your opening post was intriguing. Shoshana Zuboff articulates valid concerns about data collection and privacy... which is why I thought that this thread was primarily about data privacy, privacy in a digital age, privacy in the face of technology and surveillance.
There is no doubt (in my view) that some sort of surveillance by those tasked with preventing crime (thus providing security for the rest of us), or catching those who commit crimes (thus at least providing resolution for those affected by criminal acts) is necessary in this age. To what extent that surveillance creeps like an aggressive weed over the curb of our general privacy is a very knotty topic.
I can say that I am adamantly against the use of face recognition and gait recognition as used by China, where it is part of a political tool for suppression. I have to recognise that I must have some degree of confliction with this, because if I or a loved one were attacked, and the police said, "Shall we run facial recognition to see if we can catch the person who did this?" I would not be saying "No, don't, because I have a moral objection to using facial recognition."
Yet... I would feel very uncomfortable at facial recognition software tracking my movements. It's not that I'm up to anything awful. It is simply that I am a private person, and if I want anyone to know my movements, I'll be sure to post them on Twitter in inane little up-to-the-second tweets. "Crossing the road now!" "Ooh, I'm turning down this alleyway and I'm stopping to scratch that annoying place just between my shoulderblades!" "And now I'm sneezing into my elbow - I'm being so COVID-safe!" "Oh-oh, I just spotted someone who will buttonhole me for an hour while talking about Hammond organs - I'm dashing off!" "Hmm, I'm in the supermarket now, and I'm buying Quilton triple length toilet paper" "The wind keeps blowing strands of my hair into my mouth!" and so on.
I choose what I share. Twitter is not my style. Detailing my day in every minutiae is also not my style.
There's the conundrum. I have a right to choose what I share, and not to feel myself under surveillance, because I'm not a terrorist or a berserker. But how can facial recognition tell that I'm safe to leave alone while it gets on with the business of putting drug-crazed aggressors, for instance, under surveillance? It can't. Is there an answer to such a dilemma? ...
on 12-03-2021 07:44 PM
@countessalmirena wrote:I thought that this thread was about privacy, and how trading information about one's private life may impact on the degree to which one is expected to maintain any semblance of privacy.
I did not expect this to be about vaccination (to which I conclude you are referring with your mention of health-freedom) or about Daniel Andrews and your comparison of him to a totalitarian tyrant.
It is about privacy and also what info should or shouln't be traded info-wise. Why do mention vaccination? And do you know what health-freedom means? Vaccination right to decide is only one aspect of health-freedom. There are at least five other prominent aspects.
Health freedom was only mentioned because there are a certain type of people who love to attack, mock and sometimes slander people who are passionate about certain issues. Health freedom and privacy concerns happen to be two that attract these attacks etc..
I'll reply more possibly later.
on 12-03-2021 07:47 PM
@domino-710 wrote:I have so many - I've forgotten my ' real name '. LOL
My real name is Katis Trophik and I don't care who knows
on 12-03-2021 07:53 PM
Remember those stickers we all had on our fridge some years back? Be alert but not alarmed. That sounds like a sensible idea.