atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb447c9 wrote
Reply to comment by t0slink in New Bill Could Ban TikTok, Other Foreign Technology Products in US Over Data Collection Concerns by donnygel
Please provide something better than “trust me bro” to back up your claim. I have come with mainstream articles.
t0slink t1_jb469ux wrote
As pointed out, even your "mainstream articles" literally don't support your claim anywhere in them.
When asked for evidence to support the very simple claim that "G/FB sell your data," you have come up with none whatsoever.
If it's such a foregone and obvious conclusion, surely you must have plenty of sources. Please do share them. You'd certainly be able to sue for a handsome amount if you could actually prove it.
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb46d2b wrote
Now you are trolling. It’s obvious you are part of a disinformation campaign.
t0slink t1_jb46f72 wrote
"Please support your claim with sources."
"NOooo you're part of a DISINFORMATION campaign!!!!11"
- literally you.
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb46o2n wrote
- me: 100,000+ karma
- You: less than 10k
- me: comes with articles supporting my claims
- you: no articles and use gaslighting as an argument
- me: comes with facts to support my argument, I don’t need to provide my resume because I actually know what I am talking about
- you: I am a security engineer “trust me bro”
Whatever
t0slink t1_jb46us1 wrote
Are you seriously using karma to defend your claim?
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb46w5l wrote
Gaslighting
t0slink t1_jb472n8 wrote
Never understood why people like you simply can't admit when they're wrong and they can't support their claims. The world would be a better place if people like you didn't take being wrong as an attack on your identity.
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb474hw wrote
Gaslighting
t0slink t1_jb48vpu wrote
And you have children. Yikes. Reproducing with those critical thinking skills? Bit of a mistake, don't ya think?
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb498ro wrote
More gaslighting and personal attacks to support your argument? At this point troll, I will not be commenting to you, you are welcome to have the last word
skinlo t1_jb4hap3 wrote
Have some integrity and admit you are wrong. You're an embarrassment.
[deleted] t1_jb46ywx wrote
[deleted]
BoxerguyT89 t1_jb59sub wrote
That's not how this works. You are the one making the claim that they are selling the data, therefore, it is on you to provide that evidence.
You haven't done that, and nobody gives a shit about how much Reddit karma you have.
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb5b887 wrote
It is how it works, I have posted 2 solid articles. Here is a third that specifically calls out meta in the first sentence
I have backed up my claim. The poster was a troll who only gaslighted and didn’t even try to back his claim that meta and google didn’t sell data to brokers.
BoxerguyT89 t1_jb5cgeh wrote
You still don't get it or you are being purposefully obtuse. That article alleges that healthcare providers are sharing PHI with Meta, not that Meta or Google are selling data to brokers. Meta being sued is also not evidence that they are selling data to brokers.
How can he prove that Google and Meta aren't selling the data to brokers? That's like asking to prove that God doesn't exist.
Do they monetize your data by targeting ads based on it? Of course, but that's not the same thing.
You are the one making the claim and the sources you have provided do not show that at all.
atwegotsidetrekked t1_jb5fh8h wrote
I honestly don’t know why I am responding at this point except to stop disingenuous comments
On Google’s servers
After the data leaves your device, it goes to one of several downstream services, like Google’s own Ad Exchange. Google collects bid requests from all over the Internet: from both sites and apps; from phones, computers, game consoles, and TVs; and from its own as well as competing SSPs. Then it presents those bid requests to hundreds of “authorized buyers”—demand side platforms that represent advertisers. Each of those DSPs has access to a firehose of personal information about millions of different users on all different devices. Google runs billions of ad auctions per day; in the process, it shares data about millions of people and receives millions of dollars from advertisers.
The data being transferred here is all associated with at least one unique ID: this could be the ad ID which identifies your phone, the cookie ID stored in your browser, or Google’s own internal ID for your account. Either way it ties back to you. It can include geolocation information, gender, age, and interests.
And meta isn’t just selling data to the nsa data brokers, but Russia and China (and Bannon’s data analytics)
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46618582
I am done I made the case. I don’t care about pr campaigns on socials trying to whitewash bad behavior
BoxerguyT89 t1_jb5k59z wrote
> I honestly don’t know why I am responding at this point except to stop disingenuous comments
Same here.
> Data brokers purchase the data and just sell it to the NSA without legal approval.
Your words. Purchase from whom?
In the EFF article you linked:
> And companies like Google shouldn’t be able to monetize data they collect without consent even if they aren’t technically “selling” it.
Does Google monetize our personal data? Yes, everyone knows that, and if that is your point, you are correct.
Your link regarding Meta, from 2018, also mentions indirectly "selling" the data using similar methods to Google.
> I don’t care about pr campaigns on socials trying to whitewash bad behavior
Anyone that doesn't agree with me is a shill, got it.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments