|
|
|
|
|
by some_random
1973 days ago
|
|
I cannot push back against the idea that ordinary people consent to collection when they use free services enough. This is an utterly transparent myth that data collectors, aggregators, and consumers tell themselves and others to justify their actions. People do not understand what is being collected. I and probably everyone here has heard speculation that phones are constantly monitoring for keywords which are used in ads. It's an incredibly common idea that (afaik) isn't true, but shows just how little people understand how data collection works and again, what is actually being collected. People do not understand how this data is used. The best example I can think of is with pregnant women. Every ad on every platform suddenly revolving around pregnancy and caring for a newborn is not the expected outcome of just googling for some mayoclinic articles. And of course if they're trying to conceal their pregnancy or worse, have a miscarriage, this has resulted in real world harm. Finally, people cannot possibly consent to how this data will be used in the future. This should be pretty self explanatory. Those who work for organizations that sell data or information gained from data such as Google or Facebook have to convince themselves the above is not true. In which case, it makes complete sense to insist that the US military needs to have a warrant in order to collect, since obviously a warrant is needed if the target for collection doesn't consent. |
|