There Is No Free Lunch...

I wrote an article on 'free websites, data mining, and our personal information. Interested folks can read it here
http://www.stampsmarter.com/Learnin...eeLunch.html

Don

An interesting take on this issue.
Thanks for sharing this.

Thank you Don, an essential read I'd say.

Everyone should take their online privacy just as seriously as they do their offline privacy.

I agree with the conclusion of the article, namely that certain free online sites will have to convert to paid, but a major driver not mentioned in the article is that online digital advertising has suffered significant devaluation in the past year.

In June 2017, Proctor & Gamble cut its quarterly digital ad spend by $140 million. In July 2017, P&G reported that this cut had zero effect on its rate of sales growth; it discovered that it was sending millions of dollars to clickbots and web sites with fake traffic, not real buyers. This caused a shock wave through the ad tech industry, which is now viewed as one of the worst areas for private investment in high technology, with billions of dollars in VC likely to be lost as programmatic placement firms and other companies in the ad tech infrastructure gradually fail over the next 2-3 years. Facebook and Google collectively receive at least 75% of all online digital ad spending, but some commentators believe that these emperors have no clothes, because ads on their platforms simply do not make an impression as consumers have trained themselves to ignore, suppress or skim past them. The forward valuation of Facebook and Google as companies has to be seriously questioned if they are collecting data that is useless in terms of creating return for an advertiser's dollar.

Another way of responding to the article is to say: if the data collection bothers you, don't click on the ads either, but realize that this will only accelerate the conversion of free sites to paid.

The best way to describe this I've heard is - "If you're not certain what the service is selling, then you are the product."

Maybe 10 or 15 years ago when I worked for the US Dept of Commerce, they contracted with Google to manage the Department's email. Some of us complained as loudly as we could, but we were assured that Google would not breach the confidentiality of our communications, which satisfied our bosses. Need I say any more? As in The Wizard of Oz, I don't think we are in Kansas any more...

I'll be a bit lazy, and just copypaste my response to this topic from another forum where Don/51studebaker posted this as well




-k-

If people were willing to pay for what they use, some of this could be different. There has been always been someone selling something for free but had strings attached. It is just getting more sophisticated.

I want my free lunch!

As I posted on another forum, we are in the middle of a technological revolution and much of our society has not yet caught up. I wrote this...
As scb correctly points out, regulations are slowly becoming more commonplace. But our hobby is currently not acknowledging the potential privacy issues when we blindly recommend folks to use 'free' philatelic websites. This is akin to not mentioning any of the risks when we recommend auction houses to people (aka Regency).

I am not suggesting that we become paranoid, but constantly recommending 'free' websites without mentioning the privacy issues seems problematic to me. Harvesting personal information is not benign, folks should be aware that their personal data has value and that they are giving it away in exchange for use of these sites. And even if you direct users to the Terms and Conditions/Privacy policies of these sites, they are often incomplete, misleading, and so full of legalese as to be unreadable. So I felt it appropriate to try to highlight and further describe this issue.
Don

Don,

Even if you read the fine print, the concern is that the most important data is getting stolen. The IT infrastructure is just not secure - storage of data, communication. I post on these stamp forums tells people that I collect stamps. You do not need to use Facebook or use Stampworld to get most of the same information. It used to be that the magazines you subscribed to gave information for your interests to mailers.

In an age when you can, with a person's name and geographic location and very little else, utilize the internet to find out everything from their birth information to criminal records and everything in between, people should realize that the cat is already out of the bag. What you do, where you live, who you know, your relatives, your interests, your friends, what you eat, where you work, your socioeconomic profile, your political contributions and leanings, etc.. At least a few of these items are virtually gauranteed to be easily obtainable for most of us and for those who utilize social media such as Facebook much much more is there for the taking. At this point information acquisition by these sites is simply updating and fleshing out what is already out there.

Al,
My concern is not that it might be stolen, my concern is that it has been productize and sold without our knowledge. When I sign up for a website, I read the T&Cs but more importantly I evaluate how they generate income. So for example, take this community. It was obvious this community accepts donations, sell banners, and has an affiliate program. I found no additional negative references or indications that personal info was being peddled. But when I do the same discovery on, for example StampWorld, many red flags are raised. Hell, the StampWorld T&Cs were clearly written in another language and the translation is poor (at best). And if someone has an issue, are they prepared to pursue legal remedies in Belize? Is this really a website that we should be recommending without at least a 'heads up' to new collectors?

And what about the new APS initiative endorsing and driving members to use Facebook. Will members assume that if APS is suggesting Facebook as a platform that they do not need to be concerned about privacy issues? Or should APS be, at least, noting that privacy issues exist with FaceBook? Do folks understand that Facebook has said that a full 'opt out' privacy option would be a paid only product from them?

Or we can just ignore this stuff, sit back be lazy, and just let the chips fall where they may; not caring if some people get burned after we have 'helped' people. Just like the Regency situation. Lots of fingers pointed but no one here willing to admit that we recommend people to use auction houses without ever bothering to let anyone know there were risks.

I am not willing to simply tell new hobbyists 'buyer beware' and walk away. I think we should be fighting to assist every new hobbyist by arming them with the best information we can. If, after receiving this kind of help, they go out and do stupid things than I fully agree with 'buyer beware'. But to just assume that everyone knows this stuff, to just assume that others can figure it out on their own, or to assume that new hobbyists should pay for experience we can easily share is just not in my DNA.
Don

I cannot help thinking anything else but a quote by Martin Luther King Jr. here: "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than total ignorance and conscientious stupidity.". It was a valid statement then, and it applies here as well. The main issue here that most people don't understand even the very basics of online services or apps that they use daily, or how those services (or embedded services within) may profile their life and data as a product. So yes, education is the key here... But to make matters worse: most people are not even remotely interested in obtaining the education and understanding... Which is why legislative actions are pretty much the only way to harbor end users from the consequences of their chosen behavior... Sometimes the stupidity of mankind is just too much to comprehend with sane reason.

-k-

I do not see Facebook as the end all but just a way to connect with people that already use Facebook - not push people to Facebook. Many collectors are already there. It is more "short attention span" activity to show up in their news feed as teasers back to the web site.

This leads to have content on the APS web site and services to back it up.

Check out:

Do You Trust This Computer? is a 2018 documentary film that outlines the benefits and especially the dangers of artificial intelligence. It features interviews with a range of prominent individuals relevant to AI, such as Ray Kurzweil, Elon Musk and Jonathan

https://vimeo.com/263108265