Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Reverse discrimination is still discrimination (Score 3, Insightful) 280

by mujadaddy (#48047653) Attached to: Facebook Apologizes To Drag Queens Over "Real Name" Rule

The policy isn't the issue.

Yes it is.

Where is this insistence on real-naming coming from? Not the users (ie, 'the product'), but the advertisers (ie, 'the customers'). The users know their friends' aliases, but the advertisers can't or won't make that leap without some help in the form of arbitrary Terms of Use.

The policy IS the issue. The drag performers are just a symptom.

Comment: Re:Big data found her? (Score 1) 248

by mujadaddy (#46915855) Attached to: Opting Out of Big Data Snooping: Harder Than It Looks

No, I didn't miss that point, but I'm probably communicating my own position somewhat unclearly.

You may be surprised that, in fact, I actually consider myself to be something of a privacy advocate, although probably not nearly as extreme as some. I guess I still see the good that the advertising revenue has done for the web as well as the bad, so I guess I've been taking a somewhat contrary position to balance the debate.

I love a well-reasoned contrary position; nothing wrong with forcing people to think about their own.

Keep in mind that I view "advertisement" and "intrusive personal data mining" as distinct issues as well, although it would be naive to dismiss the relationship, of course.

And I said I don't mind advertising, only the distinct feeling that there's an entity-like algorithm behind the scenes ticking boxes when I do things.

Ultimately, we're probably going to need some "complete opt-out" legislation, perhaps similar to the "do not call" list for telemarketers.

That would take quite an honest & vigorous debate to enact; I doubt ten years is enough time for this, so I prefer to advocate personal obfuscation *now*...

I assume you're asking about free as in "freedom"?

No, actually; As you point out, we have "Freedom"-free (at least at the moment before the Impending US Net Neutrality Murder has played out completely). I'm saying that giving up our privacy is a 'beer-cost' which we're certainly not getting full dollar value for, at least in the US.

"do we have any online privacy?", and unfortunately, the answer is "probably not". What is the danger of a lack of privacy, aside from being worthwhile in itself? The collected data could potentially be used to actually curtail freedom instead of simply passively eroding privacy - the temptation to do so is huge. So, yeah, I do believe it's a real concern, and it's going to be a huge issue in the next decade or so as we figure out how to balance all of this realistically.

Well said, but the danger of a lack of privacy is, should be, self-evident: If I've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to see.

All that being said, I still think you're pining for an internet which basically few people actually used except a handful of academics and enthusiasts (sort of like Linux fifteen years ago, I guess). I was there, I saw it, and it was pretty damn uninteresting and far less practical than the internet we have today.

The impracticality protected us from being interesting enough to spy on. The impracticality for the average computer owner kept them off; ubiquity of the internet makes the target interesting enough to spy upon. "News for Nerds" vs. "News for Everyone"... I know it's not coming back, by the way... I just miss it.

Comment: Re:What's the difference (Score 1) 219

by mujadaddy (#46915785) Attached to: Help EFF Test a New Tool To Stop Creepy Online Tracking

I think you mean website developers are so reliant on JS these days, that they think they can't write a site without such heavy use of it that sneezing at it will break their site.

Javascript does some good stuff. When I'm building something, I make sure that the good stuff it does is on the same domain as the website on which I want it done, though. Your mileage will vary.

Comment: Re:Big data found her? (Score 1) 248

by mujadaddy (#46912701) Attached to: Opting Out of Big Data Snooping: Harder Than It Looks

Of course I use Google for searching, but I've moved on to Startpage at present to minimize my Google footprint. Youtube existed before Google bought it, and it was unarguably a better place, if not quite as convenient with respect to speed or uploading.

And that is what I think you've missed, here in the comments of a story about how onerous it is to avoid becoming a data point in dozens, hundreds of advertisers' and Snowden-knows-what-else's data files:

We don't have a choice any more.

Back when the internet was hard to use, we didn't have mom or grandma our Cousin Suzy to worry about shining a light on us. The advertising you seem to celebrate has undoubtedly expanded the internet and 'free' content availability, but this is the very situation which I'm "overly nostalgic" against.

For the record, I'm not against ads or seeing them; I'm against that relationship of one-ad-on-one-site and the rest of my browsing habits being linked or traceable or contributory outside of that scenario where I've seen an ad on one particular site. You'll say that these interlinks and the industry behind it have 'made money' out of views, but, again, my position is that the Internet is for things the Host loves, not an opportunity to make money from the mere fact of traffic.

Every one of them free for you and paid for partially or entirely with ad revenue.

Money is not the only cost. And we're barely into the debate of what the real cost of 'free' sites is.

One anecdote: I do the .NET for a Fortune 200's 'dotCom' site. I was testing something the other day, functionality based on presence of a cookie generated from a different page view and had cleared all cookies and reloaded our homepage. Other than our site, I was floored to see one hundred and forty tracking and advertising cookie domains (not just cookies) populate my list. Do you seriously still think that the 'free internet' is free?

Comment: Re:Big data found her? (Score 3, Insightful) 248

by mujadaddy (#46911417) Attached to: Opting Out of Big Data Snooping: Harder Than It Looks

The web is largely funded by advertisement.

And that fact is largely to blame for most of the problems I have with the internet.

The internet used to be a labor of love: if you loved something, you had a site. It wasn't about making a buck off of people. Call me whatever name you like, but I'd rather 300 baud of people who love what they're hosting than 1Gbps of adware.

Comment: Re:Start turning the cogs (Score 1) 978

by mujadaddy (#43161861) Attached to: Game Site Wonders 'What Next?' When 50% of Users Block Ads

Unfortunately, for all the talk of micro-payments, I've never seen a serious attempt at implementing them.

So the problem isn't that commercial websites are greedy, it's that banks, et al, are greedy? Surely there's a simple solution staring everyone in the face that I can't think of right now either.

Also, I'm not discounting the fact that Google is a big part of the Ad Thing's perpetuation. Finding [N] on the internet used to be done differently when you weren't guaranteed money for it...

Comment: Re:I used to block ads (Score 1) 978

by mujadaddy (#43161007) Attached to: Game Site Wonders 'What Next?' When 50% of Users Block Ads

If the threat is that all the commercial enterprises are going to vanish from the internet and we're going to end up back in a time when the internet was for enthusiasts generating and trading information and content among each other without having to monetize absolutely every fucking page load, then by all means -- I'm on board.

This, so fucking hard. Used to be you spent hundreds a month on modem fees to give your BBS content away.

Cobol programmers are down in the dumps.

Working...