Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'privacy for blah' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
privacy for blah
Authored by: mikerose on Aug 26, '05 04:15:17PM
Blah:
I think you make some good points on the issue of courtesy in allowing people to opt-out of Plaxo, sixdegrees, .Mac preemptively ("Hey, I'm going to start using Plaxo, want out?"). It would be the nice thing to do. If I wanted to deal with all the bounces from all the bogus ancient e-mail addresses in my book, I would have done it.

I don't think, however, that I want to get a teensy e-mail from hundreds of people each time they turn on, say, .Mac synchronization, to upload their contacts for online access, and my name is in their address book, asking me "OK by you?" Do you want those e-mails? How about the next time they turn it off & back on? Would a global opt-out list of e-mail addresses do the trick, so you'd only have to register once? Woops, problem there -- you'd have to register your identity with some sort of online entity to opt out. Darn those catch-22s! :-)

Saying "(Service X) is evil because they collect personal information" or "Nobody should use (Service Y) without getting permission from everyone first" is like saying "McDonald's food should come with a warning label because it's unhealthy and people need to be reminded of that." We may have consensus that they are possibly harmful, but disagree on the need for a remedy (ask permission first vs. select people judiciously and remove them on request).

You also said:

When someone gives you their personal information, they are entrusting you to treat it as such. So unless you ask, you have no idea if they would want you to be giving it out - particularly to an online social networking company.

Suppose I was just using it for business contacts. When someone hands me a business card, they have minimal expectation of privacy -- in many cases they are expecting me to share their contact info with colleagues. Still object?

I'm also not certain what expectations, entrustments or other presumptions apply to the exchange of name, address, or e-mail address -- particularly e-mail, the discursive mode is still so young. You may feel that by giving me your e-mail address, you have bound me into a compact of silence that precludes me storing it anywhere except my personal, well-secured PC and a paper backup; someone else may feel differently, and not care as much (and I would bet that most people fall in the second category, whether by deliberate choice or by ignorance). MY assumption would be, if you give me your e-mail address, you expect me to treat it with reasonable care (= "not posting it on alt.talk.likely-409-scam-suckers") but not extraordinary care (= "as closely as I guard my credit card numbers"). Long and short, if your expectations are more stringent than most, it's on you to tell me that you want your info handled extra-carefully when you give it to me, otherwise it gets handled like all the other info I have (which may be stored on third-party servers or services for my convenience).

You said:

Sorry, I really don't want to sound like a totall a$$ here, but your comments are only relevant for those people who don't care what you do with their info. And until/unless you ask, you don't know.

No I don't know, but I make assumptions based on the social compact as I perceive it, and most people do not have the same concerns you do (leaving aside the question of whether they SHOULD have the same concerns, which is an open issue). I could go back to my 9th-grade girlfriend and ask her how she wants her e-mail address handled, but honestly I think she would consider me a stalker.

I have lots of contacts, and unless they tell me in advance that their info is private (and some might, ie. unlisted phone number, private e-mail address) I am not going to process them separately, or think about them all the time, because I have a life to lead. :-)

One 'spam' to your address book in advance would take care of that, and companies like Plaxo, Apple and everyone else, if they were responsible would point that out, instead of trying their damnedest to get you to pass along personal data that they would never otherwise get. That's what's evil, to use the term someone else here posted.

Yeah, but the point is I don't want to spam everyone and tell them I need their new address info, because then they will SEND IT TO ME, and I will have to type it all in, and that will take time that I lack, that being why it all got out of date in the first place, and I don't even like most of these people.

If I spam them and say "I'm signing up for Plaxo and you may hear from me again in a day or so, but this time it'll be with wee icons in the message, and if you don't want to be on my list on Plaxo let me know, and if you don't know what Plaxo is then I'll be sure to spend a lot of my valuable address-typin' time explaining why you might or might not want to be on my address list thereon..." they will think a) I am crazy and b) they don't even like me either.

'Evil' is a strong word. The Nazis were 'evil.' Child pornographers are 'evil.' I think for what Plaxo etc. are doing, 'Marketing' may be closer. IMHO, things like supermarket discount cards, frequent flyer programs and magazine subscription sweepstakes are further down the 'good/evil' continuum.

We can continue this offline if you like. If you send me an e-mail I promise never to put your address on Plaxo. However, it might wind up on .Mac inadvertently, and it will certainly be on my Exchange server and Blackberry -- can't be helped! :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]