(public).sospep.events ~ view task ~ CREATE-article

<h1 style="text-align: center;">CREATE-article# #&nbsp;</h1>
<h2>[previously]</h2>
<ol>
<li>]</li>
</ol>
<h2>[currently]</h2>
<ol>
<li>] NEW tool for summarizing - &nbsp;Intellexer Summarizer NE -&nbsp;http://summarizer.intellexer.com/intellexer_summarizer_ne.html</li>
<li>] SRC = show-hn, 2016-10-dd, &nbsp;+] best of</li>
</ol>
<h2>[next]</h2>
<ol>
<li>]</li>
</ol>
<div>
<div>summarized ART - privacy , sRC = best-of-hn-2016-mm-dd</div>
<div>Google and a few other companies came up with a business model.</div>
<div>Google and the other early ad-tech companies worked out that they could place ads on other people's websites, and that those ads could act as a two-way conduit between web users and Google.</div>
<div>The information could be used to target you for ads, and the sites that placed Google ads on their pages would get a little money for each visitor.</div>
<div>The websites themselves became part of Google's ''inventory'' where it could place the ads, but they also improved Google's dossiers on web users and gave it a better story to sell to advertisers.</div>
<div>As more and more companies twigged to the power of ''surveillance capitalism,'' these agreements proliferated, as did the need for them, because before long, everything was gathering data.</div>
<div>Jonathan A. Obar and Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch, a pair of communications professors from York University and the University of Connecticut, published a working paper in 2016 called ''The Biggest Lie on the Internet: Ignoring the Privacy Policies and Terms of Service Policies of Social Net-working Services.''</div>
<div>The paper details how the profs gave their students, who are studying license agreements and privacy, a chance to beta-test a new social network (this service was fictitious, but the students didn't know that).</div>
<div>To test the network, the students had to create accounts, and were given a chance to review the service's terms of service and privacy policy, which prominently promised to give all the users' personal data to the NSA, and demanded the students' first-born children in return for access to the service.</div>
<div>As you may have gathered from the paper's title, none of the students noticed either fact, and almost none of them even glanced at the terms of service for more than a few seconds.</div>
<div>You can't examine the terms of service you interact with in any depth - it would take more than 24 hours a day just to figure out what rights you've given away that day.</div>
<div>But as terrible as notice-and-consent is, at least it pretends that people should have some say in the destiny of the data that evanescences off of their lives as they move through time, space, and information.</div>
<div>The vast majority of these interactions will be glancing, momentary, and with computers that have no way of displaying terms of service, much less presenting you with a button to click to give your ''consent'' to them.</div>
<div>Every car that drives past you will have cameras that record your like-ness and gait, that harvest the unique identifiers of your Bluetooth and other short-range radio devices, and send them to the cloud, where they'll be merged and aggregated with other data from other sources.</div>
<div>The ads are always the most interesting part of old magazines, because they suggest a time when people were much more naive about the messages they believed.</div>
<div>If Facebook can't figure out how to justify its ad ratecard based on the data it knows about you, it can just plot ways to find out a lot more about you and buoy up that price.</div>
<div>The data that the services collect will be even more toxic in its potential to harm us.</div>
<div>Right now, companies that breach their users' data face virtually no liability.</div>
<div>Some lawyer is going to convince a judge that, say, 1% the victims of a deep-pocketed company's breach will end up losing their houses to identity thieves as a result of the data that the company has leaked, and that the damages should be equal to 1% of all the property owned by a 53 million (or 500 million!</div>
<div>The danger is the terms of service.</div>
</div>

~ view task ~ TaskGroup] CONTENT-Data FROM [ Plan] plan-projects IN [ calendars] prj-025-sospep-content-data