Brontoforumus Archive

Discussion Boards => Thaddeus Boyd's Panel of Death => Topic started by: Thad on November 11, 2011, 07:57:42 AM

Title: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on November 11, 2011, 07:57:42 AM
Facebook to make all privacy invasions opt-in. (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/facebook-settlement-will-make-all-future-privacy-changes-opt-in.ars)

Huh.  Maybe I'll finally start using the damn thing.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on November 29, 2011, 12:04:02 PM
Facebook to make all privacy invasions opt-in. (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/facebook-settlement-will-make-all-future-privacy-changes-opt-in.ars)

More (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/facebook-settles-with-ftc-under-privacy-watch-for-20-years.ars): not only must all future privacy changes be opt-in, but they're subject to FTC privacy audits for the next 20 years.
Title: Re: What the fuck?
Post by: Mongrel on January 25, 2012, 08:54:42 AM
This is the wrong thread, but for the life of me I can't recall or see the thread we use for Facebook/Computer privacy issues.

Anyway PUBLIC SERVICE MESSAGE Facebook is making Facebook Timeline MANDATORY (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/your-facebook-past-is-coming-back-timeline-mandatory/article2314218/) - meaning your entire posting history will be public.

There is a one-week grace period/notice period to delete stuff and then that's it. So uh, FYI guys.
Title: Re: Re: What the fuck?
Post by: Thad on January 25, 2012, 09:45:12 AM
I've just been sticking it in the social media thread.

Huh.  That sounds an awful lot like it violates their settlement (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/facebook-settles-with-ftc-under-privacy-watch-for-20-years.ars).
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on January 26, 2012, 07:19:10 AM
Here's a thread.  If you spot more posts that should go here let me know and I can move them.

Anyway, speaking of new, potentially invasive privacy policies that may violate standing agreements with the FTC, it is perhaps unsurprising that Google is also in the news for this (http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012/01/pascals-wager-googles-new-privacy-policy-could-anger-ftc.ars).
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on February 06, 2012, 07:37:21 AM
Ars: Over 3 years later, "deleted" Facebook photos are still online (http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/02/nearly-3-years-later-deleted-facebook-photos-are-still-online.ars)

Now, it is, of course, good to remember that once you upload a photo, deleting it doesn't prevent the people who have already downloaded it from continuing to propagate it.

But in this case, it would appear that deleting it doesn't even actually delete it.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on February 17, 2012, 09:24:03 AM
WSJ via Doctorow: Google caught circumventing iPhone security, tracking users who opted out of third-party cookies (http://boingboing.net/2012/02/17/wsj-google-caught-circumventi.html)

Quote
The WSJ reports that Google overrode users' privacy settings (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970204880404577225380456599176-lMyQjAxMTAyMDEwNjExNDYyWj.html?mod=wsj_share_email#articleTabs%3Darticle) in order to allow messages like "your friend Suzy +1'ed this ad about candy" to be relayed between Google's different domains, including google.com and doubleclick.net. This also meant that doubleclick.net was tracking every page you landed on with a Doubleclick ad, even if you'd opted out of its tracking.

I believe that Google has created an enormous internal urgency about Google Plus integration, and that this pressure is leading the company to take steps to integrate G+ at the expense of the quality of its other services.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on March 02, 2012, 11:40:51 PM
Welp, logging out of my Gmail account to keep YouTube from watching me every time I go there no longer works.

What's a good YouTube alternative if you mostly just use it to find obscure game music?

EDIT: Wait no I can still use it in Private Browsing mode.  I guess I'm gonna be essentially looking at porn 24/7 now.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Classic on March 03, 2012, 12:45:02 AM
I don't know for sure, but isn't that just a login cookie?
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Ziiro on March 03, 2012, 01:52:21 AM
http://consumerist.com/2012/03/reminder-turn-off-your-google-web-history-today.html (http://consumerist.com/2012/03/reminder-turn-off-your-google-web-history-today.html)

Don't forget to do this
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on March 03, 2012, 07:42:59 AM
That is a very handy quick-link.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on March 05, 2012, 07:19:05 AM
Yeah, I've repeatedly tried to log into my Youtube account, thinking I must have forgotten my password.  I eventually worked out that the Youtube thadboyd account is actually somebody else and I must have never actually signed up for one.

This is okay with me unless I decide I need to actually start posting videos.

Appears I already had my Google account set not to record my history, which is good.  Other'n that, I pretty much just use my Gmail account to argue with people on ComicsAlliance.  My life would probably be improved by nuking it.

Mostly using DDG for search at this point.  Still use Google for the occasional image search.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on March 05, 2012, 08:42:23 AM
Are you using DDG to avoid using Google, or are you actually getting better results in some cases?

Also, wow, I just had a flashback to the days when you'd use multiple search engines and crawl for pages to try and find what you were looking for most of the time.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on March 05, 2012, 08:51:51 AM
On the whole I'd say DDG's results probably aren't as good as Google's, but it doesn't have Google's increasingly obnoxious tendency to substitute different words for the ones I actually typed so I'd say it's a wash.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on March 06, 2012, 11:42:17 AM
What's wrong with Google's new privacy policy (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/06/why_google_privacy_policy_is_so_difficult_to_follow/)

It's the Reg, so it's got a UK/EU legal bias, but in broad strokes it applies here too.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: sei on March 06, 2012, 09:02:12 PM
What's a good YouTube alternative if you mostly just use it to find obscure game music?
Grooveshark?
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Büge on March 31, 2012, 12:08:43 PM
A teacher's aide was fired for refusing to hand over access to her facebook account to her employer. (http://mashable.com/2012/03/30/educator-suspended-facebook/)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on March 31, 2012, 03:56:41 PM
Oh yeah, denying people work because they won't provide their Facebook login to an employer in their interview is getting to be commonplace down south, so I hear.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Shinra on April 01, 2012, 03:03:57 AM
Quote
Kimberly Hester was employed directly by Less Cass Intermediate School District as an aide to a local elementary school. Last year, off work hours, she posted a picture of a co-worker’s pants around her ankles with the caption “Thinking of you”—meant to be funny—to her Facebook page.

Someone—Hester suspects a particular parent who is Facebook friend—saw the photo and complained to the school. A few days later, the district superintendent began repeatedly asking her for access to her Facebook page. Each time, Hester refused.

Soon after, the district’s special education director wrote to Hester, saying “n the absence of you voluntarily granting Lewis Cass ISD administration access to you[r] Facebook page, we will assume the worst and act accordingly.”

They wanted access to the profile to confirm the complaint of a parent. You could argue that facebook is her personal life, but the picture was of another coworker acting inappropriately. I hate to error on the side of privacy invasion, but it sounds to me like the teacher forgot how to conduct herself professionally around the parents of the students who she is entrusted with the care of. If she wanted her facebook page to stay private, she shouldn't have been accepting friend requests from parents.


Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on April 01, 2012, 09:46:24 AM
"Access to your Facebook page" is not the same as "Access to your Facebook account."  One request is appropriate, one is blatantly illegal.  Someone needs to verify exactly what was demanded.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: TA on April 01, 2012, 11:11:06 AM
First sentence of the article: "A former teacher’s aide in Michigan says she’s been fired after refusing to give her Facebook password to her supervisors."
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on April 02, 2012, 07:16:59 AM
Via Stross (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/03/not-an-april-fool-1.html), a Cult of Mac post about an app called Girls Around Me (http://www.cultofmac.com/157641/this-creepy-app-isnt-just-stalking-women-without-their-knowledge-its-a-wake-up-call-about-facebook-privacy/).  Gist is this: you pull up the app, it determines your location via GPS, and, as the name implies, finds girls (or boys) nearby, via Facebook or FourSquare, and lets you take a gander at their profiles.

It should really only take about a microsecond's thought to realize why this is horrifying.

And Stross and Brownlee both point out that the app itself is not the problem, and pulling it (which apparently Apple has now done) won't fix it.  All it is is an aggregator; all it does is provide a filter for publicly-available data.  Even Facebook itself isn't really the problem; its business model is, and that business model would exist with or without Facebook.

Stross extrapolates it further.  A handy tool for rapists is only the beginning.  How long until somebody puts one together that looks for people of a certain race, religion, or sexual orientation?  And as bad as that is when you consider lone-wolves or small bands of bigots, when you start thinking of oppressive governments it gets much much worse.


EDIT: Well this could be useful: Stop Apps From Tracking You Without Your Knowledge Using Foursquare And Facebook [How-To] (http://www.cultofmac.com/158170/stop-apps-from-tracking-you-using-foursquare-and-facebook-how-to/)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on April 03, 2012, 10:27:47 AM
Franken (http://www.technolog.msnbc.msn.com/technology/gadgetbox/sen-al-franken-facebook-google-users-you-are-their-product-609349): still the only Senator worth a damn.

Quote
In his ABA speech, Franken noted how the more that "average Americans depend on Google and Facebook daily, "the less incentive (the companies) have to respect your privacy," he said. Both of these "free" services make the bulk of their money via user profiles, allowing third parties to target ads using the extensive personal information stored there. "You are not their client, you are their product," he said.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: fullmooninu on April 03, 2012, 02:38:03 PM
Wow, that tool for rapists is super nice.

Anyway, will the privacy thing on facebook affect old accounts when it is applied. Or old accounts will have to opt-in somewhere for the newfound privacy privileges.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: McDohl on April 09, 2012, 03:08:37 PM
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/03/facebook-says-it-may-sue-employers-who-demand-job-applicants-passwords.ars (http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/03/facebook-says-it-may-sue-employers-who-demand-job-applicants-passwords.ars)

Facebook says it may sue employers who demand job applicants' passwords.

Good for them.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on April 09, 2012, 03:54:15 PM
Yeah, I realize that they're addressing this out of pure self-interest because it could literally be life-or-death for them (they know that if people start treating Facebook like it's their LinkedIn account, it's useless for advertising and they're dead), but it's nice to see that things lined up in a good way.

They probably don't have any actual plans to sue for now (and don't want to be bombarded by user requests), but are hoping the threat may produce something of a chilling effect on Facebook password requests. 
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Büge on April 26, 2012, 10:01:51 AM
Do you know what your Klout score is? No? That's okay, you probably weren't going to get that job anyway (http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2012/04/ff_klout/).
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on April 26, 2012, 01:19:04 PM
That guy was applying for VP of Marketing though.

It IS scary to think that we now have to deal with the social eqivalent of a credit score - especially since, Kloutwise, a lot of us just don't have any fucking credit - but yeah that example in particular is indicative of fuck-all.  I'd have booted him out of my office too the moment he admitted he was ignorant of what's going on in his own field.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: TA on April 26, 2012, 04:12:52 PM
I think the awareness of Klout has made me more depressed than anything.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on April 26, 2012, 04:16:44 PM
No kidding.

I always wondered when I would reach that old-man point where you feel so hopelessly obsolete that dealing with new technology just becomes a wall of denial. Now I know.

Twitter was bad enough. I just can't bring myself to have anything to do with these merciless treadmills.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: TA on April 26, 2012, 04:20:01 PM
No kidding.

I always wondered when I would reach that old-man point where you feel so hopelessly obsolete that dealing with new technology just becomes a wall of denial. Now I know.

Twitter was bad enough. I just can't bring myself to have anything to do with these merciless treadmills.

I just don't really dig the Twitter format.  But Klout?  Oh, I understand Klout perfectly.  It makes a lot of sense.  But the very concept makes me so incredibly depressed I just want to lock myself in my room and never come out.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: McDohl on April 26, 2012, 04:24:40 PM
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml)

CISPA is being rammed through the House after a change for the worse.

Obama's intending to veto it already, but still.

And a veto for CISPA is a veto for protecting children.  So sayeth the Republican talking points.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on April 26, 2012, 04:33:09 PM
You guys do realize that the only thing that Klout really tracks is your effectiveness as a marketing vector, right?  It has certain implications re: market power (if you have 0 Klout and threaten to badmouth an establishment, they have a reason to not care beyond the reasons they probably already didn't care) but not much more beyond that.

Potentially, Klout could be a really powerful force for budging institutions that are notoriously hard to move.  Imagine if a couple guys with 92+ Klout started talking about CISPA (which they need to if they don't want the very foundations of their own power source to become vulnerable).  Last time the Internet needed protecting it took a multibillion dollar self-interested juggernaut to throw its weight; now you could potentially do it with just the right kind of personal-cult loudmouths.

The implications for evil are of course pretty much the same.

But let's be honest: if you're on the Internet and are just NOW becoming wary of the increasing power of an unfiltered opinion, well, welcome to the party I guess.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: TA on April 26, 2012, 04:48:15 PM
You guys do realize that the only thing that Klout really tracks is your effectiveness as a marketing vector, right?  It has certain implications re: market power (if you have 0 Klout and threaten to badmouth an establishment, they have a reason to not care beyond the reasons they probably already didn't care) but not much more beyond that.

Potentially, Klout could be a really powerful force for budging institutions that are notoriously hard to move.  Imagine if a couple guys with 92+ Klout started talking about CISPA (which they need to if they don't want the very foundations of their own power source to become vulnerable).  Last time the Internet needed protecting it took a multibillion dollar self-interested juggernaut to throw its weight; now you could potentially do it with just the right kind of personal-cult loudmouths.

The implications for evil are of course pretty much the same.

But let's be honest: if you're on the Internet and are just NOW becoming wary of the increasing power of an unfiltered opinion, well, welcome to the party I guess.

It tracks a lot more than that, though.  High Klout doesn't happen by accident - it is a reflection of the combination of skill, drive, and opportunity necessary to *get* high Klout.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on April 26, 2012, 05:17:38 PM
How is that contradictory to anything I just said?
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Büge on April 26, 2012, 07:12:47 PM
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml)

CISPA is being rammed through the House after a change for the worse.

Well, yeah. They have to get it into the books before the liberal leftist commie blogosphere is roused into action.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on April 26, 2012, 08:25:38 PM
Brent, I don't think anyone would argue that you're not technically correct. The inventor himself has this sort of naive well-intentioned idea that the thing will be used for exactly what you say, giving voices to the voiceless, etc. Hell, I agree with you that they were right to blow off the marketing guy in that interview due to his obliviousness of an major evolving marketing tool.

The problem is that if Klout really does become widespread, there's a very strong chance that people will not think of it as "A marketing tool". They're going to think of it as a quantification of how cool and important they are. It's like that snarky .jpg of the Orwell quote warning against hypersimplification with a facebook "like" button next to it. With such open-ended things as social media platforms, it doesn't matter what they're supposed to do, it matters what people make out of them.

In fact, Facebook or Twitter are a great example. Those things already have problems with people who think that the number of friends or followers you have is equal to some kind of win-at-life score (which is just a public quantification of something we all remember from school anyway). The thing is, Facebook, Twitter, and the like nominally have some other useful purpose as their main function; the Pokemon version of social interaction is just a side-effect. But the thing is, that nonsense is Klout's whole reason to exist.

So yeah, sure, it can be used for good. And I expect that if it takes off it will be sometimes. But I think the mundane day-to-day effect will be a much more negative one overall, with people trying (and mostly failing) to game their "cool on the internets" scores like they were min-maxing a shitty D&D character.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on April 26, 2012, 08:41:36 PM
You make it sound like the internet invented social climbing.

I suspect the status quo will be mostly unchanged: A few (but seemingly many) people will buy into it, the quiet majority will do something else with their lives and be effectively invisible, and Twitbook will align itself to whatever marketing purpose it serves until suddenly and totally unexpectedly subsumed by a set of social media app that everyone else can use without much fuss, kicking off a new revolution of the cycle.  Fuggit.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on April 26, 2012, 08:48:42 PM
You make it sound like the internet invented social climbing.

I went out of my way to say that wasn't the case.

No, the internet didn't invent social climbing, but it is the place where continuous effort is being made to reducing social status to a single easily-quantifiable number.

Maybe if lived in a post-scarcity world then Down And Out In The Magic Kingdom would be fine. But we don't. The marketing guy not getting a job is one thing, but people are lazy and HR dorks already look for bullshit "metrics" to make their jobs easier. And there are umpty-ump other things that tie in to your social status that have real material impacts.

I'm not saying it will happen, but it's certainly possible (omg slippery slope!). People are stupid and look for shortcuts. If they can press button to receive bacon, they generally will.

I guess we'll see how this gets adopted. Maybe you're right and nobody will think too much of it. I can only hope.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on April 27, 2012, 09:48:24 AM
CISPA is being rammed through the House after a change for the worse.

Obama's intending to veto it already, but still.

If he ACTUALLY DOES IT, he might win my vote back.

He said he'd filibuster telecom immunity, too.

(Anyway, I don't think it'll get to him because the Senate can't pass goddamn anything.)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Smiler on April 28, 2012, 09:26:38 AM
Microsoft has stopped supporting CISPA due to consumer privacy concerns. (http://news.cnet.com/8301-33062_3-57423580/microsoft-backs-away-from-cispa-support-citing-privacy/?tag=mncol;topStories)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on April 28, 2012, 10:17:52 AM
Read: CISPA would allow the DoJ to use confidential information against them the next time they get sued for something.

Which, well, applies to basically every company, really.  It'd be hilarious if this thing passed and it immediately unearthed a ton of shit about Big Oil or something, but it's still not worth finally instituting a real full Big Brother policy.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on June 07, 2012, 08:29:30 AM
So the proposed standard for the cookie "Do Not Track" list actually...mandates that it be opt-in on the user's side (http://boingboing.net/2012/06/07/proposed-do-not-track-spec.html).

IE10 was going to have the do-not-track function turned on by default; now it's not going to because that would be a standards violation.

So, uh, we now live in a topsy-turvy world where MS has been forced to comply with Web standards and I believe that to be a BAD thing.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Classic on June 07, 2012, 08:54:10 AM
Because of the nature of participation in opt-in vs. opt-out programs, this is probably the only way to keep ad-based services on the net viable.

The mouse already has a giant fucking glass of milk and, apparently, a gun.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on June 07, 2012, 09:54:04 AM
Because of the nature of participation in opt-in vs. opt-out programs, this is probably the only way to keep ad-based services on the net viable.

Well, bullshit.  Google can go back to serving ads that are directly pertinent to the specific search you are looking at or the specific site you are on, Facebook can limit its data mining to things you have actually deliberately clicked the "Like" button on, and Amazon can continue to look exclusively at items you have purchased through Amazon.

Any motherfucker tells me his business will fail if he can't continue to spy on every website his users visit and every E-Mail they send DESERVES for his business to fail.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on June 07, 2012, 11:48:44 AM
The internet grew pretty well in the decade or so before people even started mining that data.

But yeah, can't really fault a company for using information they already have.  There really needs to be a more stringent rule that webmasters need to be able to justify every single element of data they collect with something other than marketing, though.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Classic on June 07, 2012, 12:20:02 PM
What do you suppose is going to happen when clients are told that the kind of targeting they've come to expect is going to become basically nonexistent?
The mouse already has a giant fucking glass of milk and, apparently, a gun.
I don't know how many web services could survive whatever financial bullying the big ad clients are going to try to use to keep those privacy invading features they believe are helpful.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think this tracking and extra mining is actually useful or good for anyone. Also this is a genie that can be put back in its bottle, but it's going to demand a tithe in blood. I don't want a policy that's meant to make the internet more free actually make it less free.
Though, you're right. With crowdfunding more and more in the public sphere, now's probably one of the best times to try and go for it.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on June 07, 2012, 12:50:25 PM
What do you suppose is going to happen when clients are told that the kind of targeting they've come to expect is going to become basically nonexistent?

Oh, they're gonna lobby like motherfuckers.

But that's not my point.  Hell, the TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY of the DNT list is limited pretty much exclusively to large companies operating in the US, and even then the Justice Department's track record of actually stopping major computer companies from doing flagrantly illegal things is spotty at best.

My point is that the corporations whining that they can't exist unless they monitor my E-Mails are full of shit.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on June 26, 2012, 08:01:04 AM
Sonic.net deletes logs after 2 weeks (http://boingboing.net/2012/06/25/sonic-net-stopped-saving-logs.html), on the realization that no legitimate law enforcement agency has ever asked for logs older than that and only copyright trolls go on that kind of fishing expedition.

If you live in California, you might consider giving them your money.  Looks like it's DSL and you need an AT&T land line, so that part kinda sucks.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: jsnlxndrlv on June 26, 2012, 08:37:10 PM
ISPs across America (in cooperation with content-owners) voluntarily adopt anti-piracy measures based around periodically monitoring internet usage for potential copyright violations and interrupting offending sessions, throttling bandwidth, requiring the offender to pass a "copyright education" class before service is restored, or worse, all starting July 1st. (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/15/american-isps-to-launch-massive-copyright-spying-scheme-on-july-12/)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on June 26, 2012, 10:40:23 PM
Let the rage commence!
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on August 09, 2012, 10:53:37 AM
Google ordered to pay $22.5M (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/08/google-to-pay-biggest-ftc-fine-ever-for-tracking-safari-users/) for that "let's ignore Safari users' privacy settings" business.

Not much money for Google, but it's still a good start.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Niku on August 13, 2012, 05:11:26 AM
Database (http://www.lousytippers.com/) for waiters and drivers to post about their lousy tipping customers .. where they post their home addresses and phone numbers.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on August 13, 2012, 06:39:41 AM
Man, that is some 1995-ass Web design.

In fairness, it's POSSIBLE those addresses are for the restaurants; it says "Street Address or Restaurant".  And most entries do not have a street address.

On the one hand, I don't have a hell of a lot of sympathy for someone who writes "Get a real job" under "Tip" on a piece of paper that has his name on it.  If you actually actively insult your server, you're basically daring them to do something like this.  Doesn't justify it, but it shouldn't really be a surprise.

Short of that?  There are lots of reasons someone might leave a bad tip, many of which boil down to how this economy sucks.

As far as being an effective way of shaming somebody?

Well, either it was a one-time thing or it wasn't.  If it was a one-time thing, then telling the Internet about it is unnecessary and unfair.  If the person is a HABITUAL lousy tipper, then it's STILL unnecessary, because guess what, every restaurant that person goes to on a regular basis already knows.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: TA on August 13, 2012, 06:54:17 AM
So, what's the possible goal here?  Harassment of "bad tippers"?  Deliberately fucking with their food if you recognize them?

Fuck a lot of this.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Royal☭ on August 13, 2012, 08:01:20 AM
Nice little manifestation of America's class war.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Brentai on August 13, 2012, 08:38:43 AM
If you assume the customer is always in a higher social class than the servicer, anyway.  I see it as more of a continuation of the breakdown of mutual respect.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Classic on August 13, 2012, 08:58:47 AM
I see it as a continuation of the breakdown of mutual respect.

Well, yes, but it's based on this assumption:

Assume the customer is always in a higher social class than the servicer.

It's pretty ubiquitous.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Royal☭ on August 13, 2012, 09:18:42 AM
That's not my assumption. My assumption is that the tipper and the server are both either middle or lower class. The class war I referred to is the act of pitting customer and server against each other via the tipping system, rather than just paying servers a living wage.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Thad on August 16, 2012, 10:07:37 AM
Ars: Over 3 years later, "deleted" Facebook photos are still online (http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/02/nearly-3-years-later-deleted-facebook-photos-are-still-online.ars)

Now, it is, of course, good to remember that once you upload a photo, deleting it doesn't prevent the people who have already downloaded it from continuing to propagate it.

But in this case, it would appear that deleting it doesn't even actually delete it.

Ars: Three years later, deleting your photos on Facebook now actually works (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/08/facebook-finally-changes-photo-deletion-policy-after-3-years-of-reporting/)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on August 16, 2012, 10:17:18 AM
I love how Hotmail will no longer let me access my email account without giving them personal information, UNLESS I close the tab and then re-type the URL in a new tab, which takes me to my inbox since I'm still logged in.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: sei on August 18, 2012, 08:57:26 AM
Database (http://www.lousytippers.com/) for waiters and drivers to post about their lousy tipping customers .. where they post their home addresses and phone numbers.
Searched Irvine, CA.

Quote
Atlus USA., Inc.
Seems to be some kind of computer game company. employees are all obese middle aged men who seem to think they are chinese or south east asian. Place smelled like ass and pre-cum
[Bill] Over $100.00
[Tip] $0.00
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Classic on August 18, 2012, 02:13:35 PM
Huh. You'd think a gratuity would already be assessed.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: TA on August 18, 2012, 04:04:48 PM
Huh. You'd think a gratuity would already be assessed.

It would, but the people who would post to this sort of thing are also the sort of people that expect you to tip on top of that.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Friday on August 18, 2012, 04:28:42 PM
I hated bad tippers when I worked as a waitress, but only because I depended on tips to make rent and bills. It wasn't really the people I hated, but the system.
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on August 18, 2012, 04:43:57 PM
Huh. You'd think a gratuity would already be assessed.

It would, but the people who would post to this sort of thing are also the sort of people that expect you to tip on top of that.

Since the quote described the office/workspace, I figured that was for a delivery order.

I hated bad tippers when I worked as a waitress, but only because I depended on tips to make rent and bills. It wasn't really the people I hated, but the system.

It's too ingrained to change unless restaurant owners or governments forced the issue (I doubt they will), but I really don't think the system in North America works very well anymore. People are too dependant on tips since wages of servers are artificially depressed (exceptions to allow below-minimum wage for servers, etc.), so the average person won't stiff people them under any but the worst circumstances, which I think actually undermines the whole idea. Ultimately, I'd prefer to see fixed bills, including tip, with real cash tipping being much rarer and only in cases of exceptional service.

Tipping here is now in this semi-official no-man's land where we acknowledge that it exists but don't track it comprehensively, which is really awkward and probably the worst of both worlds. I'd rather we either monitor it in full and completely include it in income (the eventual result of which is mandatory tips on all bills by default) or cease acknowledging it in any official way (which would mean removing the exemption that allows servers to be underpaid). Right now we're starting to get bullshit like IRS (or Canada Revenue) auditing the tax returns of servers, with no documentation, no obligation on the part of the employer, and other ridiculous nonsense. 
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on August 28, 2013, 05:01:24 AM
How penis pills (indirectly) helped improve and protect email privacy (http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/08/enzyte_steven_warshak_the_surprising_case_that_helped_improve_email_privacy.html)
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on October 27, 2013, 01:28:13 PM
Okay, so it looks like Facebook is going to be working with the police to shut down protests?

http://privacysos.org/node/1217 (http://privacysos.org/node/1217)

Not sure how legal this is? (Haha, as if the legality is more important than "Can they get away with it?")
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Sharkey on October 31, 2013, 10:28:11 AM
Not sure how legal this is?

I can't believe how often this is coming up today, but yeah, that's fuckoff illegal. It'd be the world's easiest paycheck for a prosecutor.

"Hobson v. Wilson."

*drops mic*
Title: Re: Online Privacy
Post by: Mongrel on December 16, 2013, 03:14:40 PM
Thousands of Germans get warning letters for watching copyrighted porn (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/16/thousands-germans-legal-warning-letters-copyrighted-porn)

Quote
Solmecke said he had received thousands of calls from people unsure whether to pay the fine or not. "Most of them remember having accessed RedTube.com in the past, though none of them had very clear recollections about the titles and storylines of the films they had watched."