There really never was such thing as "privacy" from the start. At least not 100%. Websites too, can track a lot of user data. Not all track and/or use the same data, nor in the same way; depends on the site, their practices, and policies. Cookies, scripts and other telemetry necessary for the basic mechanics of web operations report home a lot of user information.
So besides ISPs, some websites may sell info about their visitors to whomever.
Much of these "behind the scenes" operations usually are for tailoring(or targeting) advertising to any particular web user. Depending who you ask, that may or not be ok; everyone's got their own needs, values and tolerances.
Google, a few years ago, announced that the content of Gmail user's emails would be analyzed by their bots in order to "tailor content"(read: select advertisers) for their users. Myself, I would prefer not to receive ads for funeral homes because I was discussing old Aunt Mabel's serious illness via Gmail. But I think, consciously or subconsciously, many of us have modified our email practices in some way.
But this isn't so much about cookies and ads; I did think it was worth mentioning though because it was at least, tangentially related.
A greater danger we face is the malicious or mistaken application and manipulation of granular data in building up profiles of users. We already know that there are many cases in which profiling has definitely not been to the benefit of many citizens.
It's not that this danger never existed before; but this proposed bill, imo poorly thought out with way insufficient scope, is yet one more means of introducing a a mechanism that has the potential to do more harm than good.
On a somewhat "pedestrian" level, we know that while travelling via a mode other than land or sea, we do not make comments or jokes about certain objects or topics; indeed there have been many cases where the course of a traveler's day has been altered. On the internet level there's a whole shipload more of random and related or unrelated data that can be cross-referenced, interpolated and otherwise misinterpreted(or willfully manipulated) towards an improper and invalid conclusion.
More-so than the just the raw data, is who or what individuals and agencies process this data: what are their qualifications, mandates, performance histories/audits, etc.?
There's already enough wild cards in the deck, without this newest bill, to dilute and suppress personal freedoms, liberties and sense of presumed innocence. The watchers need to be watched much more closely than the watchees.
Return to Odd
Reply to message