
‘The Age of Surveillance Capitalism’ Review - Jerry2
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism-review-the-new-big-brother-11547509779
======
DoubleGlazing
The depressing thing about all this is that it is getting harder to opt-out of
being surveiled.

Even if you ditch your phone and computers, there are still way to track you.

Just look at some of the crazy stuff happening in retail where facial
recognition is used in some stores and malls to track where you go and what
you look at in order to manipulate you in to buying more. It may be niche
right now, but as the tech develops and gets cheaper it's use will become more
widespread.

------
mises
I've commented on their before, but my concern is more with the government
having my data than companies. I hate both, but government is worse. Case
study China.

Please. I don't care if it's left, right, or center. Next election, support
someone who won't turn America into a technologically-enabled police state.

~~~
clouddrover
> _my concern is more with the government having my data than companies_

If the data exists then companies and governments alike will exploit it
regardless of who collected it. Your internet usage, your phone records, even
your DNA profile if you used a DNA profiling service can all be accessed at
will without your knowledge or consent:

[https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-retention-laws-by-
countrie...](https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-retention-laws-by-countries/)

In an age when your own data can be weaponized against your best interests I
think the only sensible strategy is to minimize your data footprint as much as
possible. Do not join "loyalty" programs, do not sign up to surveillance
platforms like Facebook, do not submit your DNA to DNA databases, pay in cash
whenever possible, etc.

You will inevitably be undermined by other people forking over your data to
surveillance platforms but you can only do the best you can and hope to
persuade as many people as possible to do similarly.

~~~
est31
> Do not join "loyalty" programs, do not sign up to surveillance platforms
> like Facebook, do not submit your DNA to DNA databases, pay in cash whenever
> possible, etc.

I'm doing most of that already but even if you do all of these things, there's
still the "friends" problem. The friends who use one of those apps that upload
all of their contacts to the central server. The friends who use facebook. The
family members who submit DNA to DNA databases. Very likely your friends are
similar to you, so they serve as good predictors for your own data. As is for
your family members, they usually have very similar DNA to yours :).

E.g. if your friends all live in one certain city, then you likely are to live
there as well. If you have a suspiciously high amount of medical doctors in
your friend circle, you are most likely one yourself. If 50% of your contacts
are LGBT community members, you are likely to be one, too.

The data hoarders of this world don't need you to submit your data yourself in
order to have your data.

~~~
matz1
The solution is radical transparency, make all of this transparent, including
people in government.

~~~
gringoDan
Wasn't this the plot of The Circle, by Dave Eggers?

------
tmp092
I feel like scraping my bank transaction data to be the most violating breach
of my privacy (more so than my likes), and yet companies like Plaid are
thriving because people are willing to give up access to years of bank
transaction history to use apps like Robinhood.

~~~
ndnxhs
For this reason I have been experimenting with going cash only. Its actually
not so bad and I can easily give money to those in need on the street.

~~~
DoubleGlazing
I generally use cash for everything. The exceptions being large purchases or
where I need a secondary proof of purchase.

I was once asked by my bank why I wasn't taking advantage of of the
convenience my contactless debit card offered. I said because I didn't want
them knowing what I spent my money on.

This led on to me being advised that I would struggle to get loan or mortgage
facilities because the bank would be unable to see if I was spending my money
responsibly.

I can live with that.

------
walterbell
Earlier work by Shoshana Zuboff, on corporations who see humans as a source of
data, not even as customers.

[https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/the-
digital-...](https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/the-digital-
debate/shoshana-zuboff-secrets-of-surveillance-
capitalism-14103616.html?printPagedArticle=true) (2016) &
[https://vimeo.com/110222526](https://vimeo.com/110222526) (2014)

 _> While advertisers have been the dominant buyers in the early history of
this new kind of marketplace, there is no substantive reason why such markets
should be limited to this group. The already visible trend is that any actor
with an interest in monetizing probabilistic information about our behavior
and/or influencing future behavior can pay to play in a marketplace where the
behavioral fortunes of individuals, groups, bodies, and things are told and
sold. This is how in our own lifetimes we observe capitalism shifting under
our gaze: once profits from products and services, then profits from
speculation, and now profits from surveillance._

 _> The bare facts of surveillance capitalism necessarily arouse my
indignation because they demean human dignity. The future of this narrative
will depend upon the indignant scholars and journalists drawn to this frontier
project, indignant elected officials and policy makers who understand that
their authority originates in the foundational values of democratic
communities, and indignant citizens who act in the knowledge that
effectiveness without autonomy is not effective, dependency-induced compliance
is no social contract, and freedom from uncertainty is no freedom._

~~~
gregknicholson
> ...influencing future behavior...

This is insightful (to me at least) — the next step after surveillance
capitalism is coercion capitalism.

I think the “nothing to hide / nothing to fear” people won't like being
coerced. (Also, by their logic, GAFAM should be unafraid of publishing their
algorithms — right?)

~~~
sitkack
Is that rewards programs, coupons, black friday deals, amazon prime and
rebates? I buy something a thrift books and Chase sends me a coupon for abe
books. Who knows how much data Chase is selling to whom?

~~~
walterbell
Real-time phone location can be purchased for a few hundred dollars.

------
neonate
[https://outline.com/6cVy9a](https://outline.com/6cVy9a)

------
iamkroot
I understand the discomfort that comes with having vast corporate entities in
possession of private personal information but as a user I'm somewhat confused
about not exactly it affects my day to day life, especially since I insist on
using adblock on every Internet connected device.

Perhap this book will reveal to me some dangers that I am not currently aware
of. I'll try to keep an eye out for it and read it if it can.

~~~
arkh
Let's say you want to change things one day in your country: you get into
politics or unionize. Too bad, your opponent has a back-channel access to data
about you which could be used against you if made public. Or some law is
passed and suddenly some of your old activity is made illegal: you're now on a
watchlist, let's hope you can stop your cinnamon addiction.

Let's be more day-to-day: all your data is sold to insurance companies. Where
you go, how fast you go, what kind of food you eat, your gym attendance etc.

~~~
iamkroot
That's a hypothetical situation, we could talk about those all day. And
history shows us the government doesn't really need access to my browsing
history to oppress me if that's what they want to do.

Re: insurance: Is that happening right now? I am not aware of any reports that
indicate that is currently occurring.

------
cinquemb
Technical solutions at scale to combat this is to poison the well with the aim
for actors to spend more and more of their resources on separating signal from
noise.

------
Proven
There’s no surveillance capitalism.

In capitalism you have property rights. That being so, your private
information can be protected and hence “capitalized” upon (pun intended) by
the owner because in free market you would be able to sell it (should you want
to do that) at a price that makes you willing to share your info.

So what we have is rather fascism, or extreme statism. And it’s more prevalent
in countries where the government controls more GDP (so, socialist-like
countries).

~~~
prolikewhoa
socialism != fascism

they're completely opposite on the spectrum. socialism is people's democratic
ownership of property and government.

~~~
visarga
Going into semantics! Has there even been a 'true socialism' by your
definition?

~~~
AngryData
Would you be saying the same thing if someone said North Korea was democratic
and then dismiss any arguments that it isn't democratic as 'semantics'?
Simplistic generalizations on complex, broad, and especially controversial
topics pretty much always results in ignorance based conclusions.

------
drallison
_The Age of Surveillance Capitalism_ is going to be a seminal book. I am
looking forward to receiving my personal copy tomorrow (release is January
15).

~~~
PinkMilkshake
What is the significance of this book? I'm not familiar with the author.

~~~
TuringNYC
This entire HN post is a share of a review of the book by Shoshana Zuboff: The
Age of Surveillance Capitalism Published 01.15.2019

