Comment

Comment by __jal

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years).

That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know.

I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits make money. I don't care about marketers' careers or their CTRs. I don't even care about putting a dollar value on my LTV to them.

I care about denying them visibility into my datastream. It is zero-sum. They have no right to it, and I have every right to try to limit their visibility.

Why? None of your business. Seriously - nobody is owed an explanation for not wanting robots watching.

But I will answer anyway. It is because of future risks. These professional panty sniffers already have the raw material for many thousands of lawsuits, divorces and less legal outcomes in their databases. Who knows what particular bits of information will leak in 10 years, or when FB goes bankrupt? I have no desire to be part of what I suspect will become a massive clusterfuck within our lifetimes.

If you're correct that this data has so little value, then it is more likely it will leak. FB and Google are the equivalent of Superfund sites waiting to happen, and storing that data should be considered criminal.

parent __jal 7 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton