[aeroxis]

It is actually not like you peering through his window to see and note down what you rib one out.

It's more like when I have a massive orgy with lots of drugs at my place and I invited a bouncer, who is really good at statistics, to keep track of who is coming in and who are leaving immediately. The bouncer is also keeping track of what each person is doing, and letting me know periodically. And you both are invited for a night of drug fueled insane sex.

From my perspective, I am doing this to make sure everyone is having fun at my party. From the bouncer's perspective, he is there just to collect stats and let me know. He is not there to invade my privacy. I want to do that. I hired the bouncer.

I think that is more is an accurate description.

[TeMPOraL]

The story is only outrage-inducing because you hired a well-known bouncer whose dayjob - of which everyone is aware - is being a security guard at a mall, observing everyone as they do their groceries and banking.

[babyloneleven]

You are the site owner. The bouncer works for you.

Your users didn't hire the bouncer and don't want to be tracked. Secretly, the bouncer may use this data for nefarious purposes. You can't control how the bouncer will use the data.

[mojuba]

Exactly, especially if the bouncer comes to work for you for free. Which is what Google and Facebook analytics platforms do: they are free because they benefit from the collected information in ways beyond your control.

[ysavir]

What you forgot to mention was that the bouncer does this for free and has a day job publishing tabloids.

[dhimes]

And none of the other orgy participants understand this. And OP may not fully understand it either.

[everdrive]

There's nothing I enjoy more than a bunch of nerds analyzing a metaphor to death.

[nemosaltat]

My dads mantra used to be, “if it seems too good to be true, it probably is”. Now, I find I must consistently remind him- if it’s “free” (as in beer, not speech) you’re almost definitely paying for it.

[TeMPOraL]

Related, when consuming news, if the story seems to involve ridiculous levels of stupidity or malice, the truth is most likely much more mundane and much more reasonable.

[letstrynvm]

That's the site's perspective.

The outrage is from the user's perspective. It's no different from being peeped on.

[mirimir]

Sure. But unless you go balls to the wall about it, you're always being "peeped on" when you're online.

[jhiesey]

I think that's the broader problem that the article is trying to get at. Pornography is just an example that makes it clearer to people that they should care about it.