Why Web 2.0 Will End Your Privacy

An anonymous reader writes "This is a pretty good insight into some of the dangers of social networking and website customisation -- marketing and loss of privacy. When marketeers know who your friends are and what you are all into, it makes their advertising a lot more effective. From the article: "Why are the companies worth so much money? Why is MySpace worth over half a billion dollars without a proper revenue model? Why is Digg allegedly pitched at over $20m (at the last count) without any idea of where money is going to be pulled from? The answer is - data. Information. Marketing. Every detail about you and me. That is where the money is."

Cheeky...

[toupsie]

An anonymous reader (Taco?) writes: Why is Digg allegedly pitched at over $20m (at the last count) without any idea of where money is going to be pulled from?

Meeeoooowwwww!

Oh noes!

[Uhlek]

You mean that posting intimate details of my life on the web may be an affront to my privacy?

Say it ain't so!!!

Re:It's good to be behind the times?

[tddoog]

Obviously because they don't have anything to hide, unlike a terrorist.

Re:IANAJ, but

[IDontAgreeWithYou]

Another result I find useful is that I get much more directly targeted advertising than ever before. It's nice now, no more tampax fliers in my mailbox, but it's handy to know Staples has a new SD 1G card available for my camera at less than $100.

You apparently forget where you are. On Slashdot, advertising of any kind is considered the worst oppression since the holocaust... Uh Oh... Godwin :(

Let's take it by the numbers:

[khasim]

Title: Why Web 2.0 will end your privacy

Paragraph #1: MySpace, Digg, Flickr ... no real content.

#2: One sentence stating what he believes. Then a lead in to ...

#3: A "definition". No explanation that was promised in #2.

#4: Back to Digg (see #1).

#5: Back to MySpace (see #1).

#6: Google has ads.

#7: Back to MySpace, again (see #5 & #1)

#8: Why does he belive that Gmail is anything near Outlook in functionality?

#9: Yeah, "neat". Whatever.

#10: Websites don't make money. Welcome to 1999. Don't forget to party.

#11: Companies pay lots of money for popular websites ... even when those websites don't make money. Welcome to 1999 already!

#12: YouTube. See #11 and #10.

#13: Back to the top of the page. Again, they don't make money. 1999.

#14: Why do companies want to pay so much money for websites that aren't making money? It's like it's 1999 all over again.

#15: The companies paying the money want data.

#16: Even he sees that it's 1999.

#17: Well, it is 1999. But he'll call it "Web 2.0".

#18: All those companies are compiling data on the the people who post pictures of their cats.

#19: Yahoo! knows nothing about me except the news groups I subscribe to through them.

#20: Companies will pay lots of money for "data" on "individuals" and "groups". Even if the "data" is "OMG!!1 U R A QT!!! UR cat is funee"

#21: Web 2.0 has a "bubble" and it will burst. Yeah, whatever.

#22: Free photo hosting.

That's all there is. Toss in "Web 2.0" and name some popular sites and then claim that "privacy" is going away.

Well, "privacy" does not really exist on the 'web and what you did have is vanishing ... but not because of MySpace. Because too many companies are posting your private data on the 'web and allowing anyone with the money to search through it.

Pfft

[Anonymous Coward]

Alarmists, the lot of you! The shit won't hit the fan till Web 3.11.

Re:Let's take it by the numbers:

[WilliamSChips]

1999... wasn't that the year the Matrix is set in?

Re:Creating fake people?

[Austaph]

At one point, I belive my MySpace profile said I was a 50-something-year-old, 6 feet, 300 lbs., pregnant, gay black man, and that I watched a lot of The Price is Right, and listened to mostly 80s club music. My picture was of Steve Urkel.

Re:Cheeky...

[WhiplashII]

know who your friends are

Haha! They can't touch me - I have no friends!

Patch coming soon!

[Kaetemi]

Don't worry, it will be fixed in Web 3.0