It's not illegal, but it should be. Spokeo, I think actually has opt-outs, but others don't. Exactly how in America you don't have the right to say no to having your address published is beyond me. Don't make any enemies in this world, they sure won't have any trouble finding you. There is way too much personal info available through public records. This 1970s era pseudo honor system we have is unprepared for the age of the internet, big data and sophisticated cyber crime.

Data Brokers and Your Privacy
https://www.privacyrights.org/...

270 Current Data Brokers
https://www.privacyrights.org/...

It's not secret how much I support Snowden, even if his actions were not legal. I hate supposed surveys where they don't show you the actual text of the questions asked. If I don't know how the survey asks the question, it's impossible to know how much to trust the responses. Sorry mister Snowden, your worst fears are realized. You sacrificed your own freedom to give us the chance to protect ours and most people are too ignorant to give a damn. If the ACLU actually sponsored this, they should have thrown it out. We don't need this shit in the press months before the expiration of Patriot Act Sect. 215.

Sure, but then how are they going to put all our medical records online and use big data to analyze treatments and outcomes. Oh, you don't want that? No, sorry there isn't an opt out for that. I guess even though we know businesses are incapable of protecting privacy we'll just have to be understanding that it's for our own good.

Myself, I'm preparing certified letters for my pharmacy, insurer and doctor's office to let them no they do not have my consent to do any of that and that I'd like all eligible records destroyed. Yes, I am bored, so what.

I'm working on a social media project and I do want to allow the site owner to run ads for profit if desired, but I want to protect the users and make advertising as harmless as possible. Do I need to host the ads myself if I want to enforce any protection for my users privacy and security?

My god you're right, is it time to panic yet?

Peter: "Are you saying 9/11 didn't change everything Brian?, because 9/11 changed everything.

Brian: "Peter, you didn't know what 9/11 was until 2004."

It's a conflict they just don't understand. Yes, you can know more if you spy on all human interaction, but that isn't the point. It's better to not know some stuff that could be known, so that all of the innocent people can communicate freely and without reservation. I'm much more frightened by totalitarians than terrorists. I can put it no better than this: The Loss of liberty is worse than the threat of terror.

Finance.yahoo.com, is also dying. Thank you CEO Marissa Mayer, you have taken what used to be a valuable and interesting resource for investors and completely fucking ruined it.

Regarding Yahoo mail, since you can't take your yahoo email to another server, exactly what are we supposed to do with what is for many of us what we consider our permanent email address. I don't want to tell all my contacts to find me at a new address every time a new domain becomes popular. Then again, I don't want any more job related spam their so Gmail is welcome to it. It only helps with my efforts to make sure Google's algorithms think I'm a good little soldier that only cares about work. Yahoo has gotten a worse rap than it deserves. Just because the media latches on to Google doesn't mean there is something lacking in the competition. I've had my email there for over two decades and I've never had to contact support for anything, they must do a few things right. If I go anywhere with my real mail I'd have to consider Hushmail. Lack of privacy is my only real complaint about yahoo mail.

I carry small bills loose in my pocket whenever possible in large cities. If a homeless person gives me a bad vibe, I'd rather appease them and give a couple dollars and I like to be able to do it without pulling out my wallet in front of them or anyone else who may be watching. Standing there on the street looking down and fumbling in your wallet is a bad idea.

No one thought of that because then the failure would be apparent. Nobody profits from failure, well, unless you sell the whole solution before anyone knows it failed. Hey wait, I see what happened...

The old version has fewer of the unnecessary permissions they want us all to allow. So, if we want maps on Android they expect us all to allow: Identity, Contacts, Location, Photos/Media/Files, WiFi Connection Information, Phone, Bluetooth Connection Info, Device ID & Call Information. No thank you. Do I really have to lug around an unregistered NAV device if I don't want Google seeing all this shit?

I'll be curious to see if white Americans actually still have rights. I know they are viewed as the privileged oppressors, but maybe we'll see if it can still be discrimination even if it's against white Americans.

So, Google gets to win at maps and we are just stuck with it? I can understand where can't very well offer free mapping software as a service for the whole planet and have multiple companies struggling to get people to use their version. I do hope for an alternate future where Google maps isn't the only game in town for mobile, but if Microsoft can't compete, I'm not sure who else ever will. It's not that I don't like Google Maps, but the less competition, the more leverage they have to disrespect our privacy.

I nearly learned that the hard way. As an idiot teenager I picked up a rectangular storm drain grate that was heavier than estimated. It went right into the hole and just about took me with it. It's funny I hear Google doesn't like to hire people who "just want to work for Google", but unless you really had some desire to specifically seek out Google, their interviews would seem really obnoxious. I only lasted a few interviews before it became clear I didn't want it bad enough, but I will say they didn't go off topic from the technical stuff in my case. If they pulled out some nonsense questions that far into the process I'd have been happy to explain that my job area doesn't involve golf balls, man holes, or explaining colors to fucking blind people.

Saying men negotiate harder than women do is about the most sexist thing I've heard lately from an executive.

I have long felt that companies should legally have to disclose if not, get consent to share your personal information outside your home country. I don't say this because people in other countries are any less trustworthy. My reasoning is that a person has more ability to control their risk exposure and be provided with known forms of legal recourse when their information isn't unknowingly shared or transmitted outside their own country. I've never been comfortable with the idea that when I call into a call center, they don't tell me where they are located. Now if I share my personal info with that agent, how would I possibly know if US laws and protections apply to the data I share or if the call center's IT environment is regulated to U.S. standards for audit compliance and data protection? How would I know if a breach of that unknown foreign call center network would be reported as it would under U.S. law?