So I recently found out about this Beacon program that Facebook recently implemented. If you're unaware of it, it essentially is a partnership and program between Facebook and many corporations in which any activity you perform on one of the partner sites will be recorded by Facebook, potentially displaying on your profile (depending on what you set your privacy level at), and almost assuredly that information will be sold to the other partners. HOWEVER, even if you choose the privacy option that disallows companies to post on your wall, you sleep soundly knowing that your information is still being collected.
Anyone have a problem with that? It's like 1984 except the corporations are taking the place of the government as Big Brother.
Now, I'm not saying that Facebook is the first or the only to track all of my data. I am well aware of Google's questionable privacy policies. And I also know that my information is being stored at basically every page I visit (hence, the reason I allow cookies from only pages that I frequently use and trust). However, this is probably the most egregious violation of my privacy that I have personally witnessed. It is obviously a profit-motivated strategy in which we are unknowingly, unwillingly the subjects of intense scrutiny.
Do they really think that we will get some extreme added value of knowing what book or CD our friends bought on Amazon? Or that Alex O'Hagan was playing WoW yesterday? Or Jennifer Gahenna bought whatever-the-hell at Wherever-the-hell? In reality, if something was that good, you'd find out about it. Normal advertising has served us well for a long time, and I for one am thoroughly opposed to such invasions of privacy for this alleged added value.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that this move had any altruistic motives or a motive beyond profit. To be clear, I don't think Beacon was implemented with malicious intentions; I do think that there needs to be some serious dialogue on how far companies can pry into our lives. Or, to put it another way, on how far they can go to continue to indoctrinate us into this consumer culture. (Fact: Approximately 70% of U.S. GDP is derived from consumer spending.)
Here are some basic points that I think apply here (these may or may not have been mentioned above):
1.) The definition of privacy needs to be redefined.
2.) Limits need to be placed on how far third parties are allowed to dive into your data, what data they are allowed to keep, how long they are allowed to keep it, and what they are allowed to do with it.
3.) Some serious discourse needs to be had on the purposes and motivations of corporations. It is my contention that the profit motive of corporations is an indelible, if implicit, factor in this. Why is that a problem to me? I am not convinced that profit should be the #1 aim of any corporation, but that needs to be reserved for another post.
4.) Consumers need to be very careful of what products they use and need to be aware of what they are handing over when they sign up to use services like Facebook.
5.) Education on the impacts of the loss of privacy needs to happen.
6.) I am extremely concerned about the pervasiveness of corporations into every aspect of our lives. I am no history scholar, but I would go so far as to say that the role that corporations play in society today far outstrips the role that the Catholic Church played in Europe in the Middle Ages (partly due to technology).
Anyway, I am getting off topic and can offer my critique of capitalism another time. To close, there are at least two things you can do to help protect your information.
1.) Use the privacy settings (under External Websites under the Privacy options) to disallow companies to post stories on your profile. Please not the caveat above: your information will still be collected, just not used in quite the same manner.
2.) If you use Firefox, you can download an extension called Blocksite to prohibit Beacon from working (at least in theory). Details here. There are other add-ins that can enhance privacy like Track Me Not and NoScript, so check those out.
There is a way to block sites using IE and Netscape (as far as I know), but I don't know how to do it.
Take care.
P.S.: Sorry for the length of this, but I had a closing thought: For all the ease of life that technology was supposed to offer (which it has in some respects), it is providing us with a whole new set of complications that are far more tenuous and impacting than any of us could have ever imagined.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
The Deplorability of Theocracies and Arcane Religious Ideals
A woman and a man were gang-raped in Saudi Arabi then convicted of having an affair and sentenced to 90 lashes and a prison term. Their sentence was for breaking laws pertaining to segregation of the genders.
The woman later confessed to cheating on her husband, so her and the man's punishments were increased to 200 lashes. Surprising to me, their attackers' punishments were also increased.
Adultery is a punishable offense under Islamic law, and, since Saudi Arabia is a theocratic state, such barbarism is completely legitimate in their eyes.
I have huge problems when the state and religion are commingled in such a way. In my mind, government has no place dictating the morality and punishment of actions like adultery. There, of course, should be recourse for the cheated upon spouse, but nothing like a state imposed sentence of whipping.
Moreover, I am greatly opposed to ideas within a religion that vindicate the unethical, savage behavior of the Saudi state towards its constituents.
It is reasonable to assume that this woman was forced into this marriage and was extremely unhappy, so I can understand why she may want to escape her marriage. However, I wonder under what conditions she confessed this adultery? Was it under duress and torture? Did she confess only so that her accusers would hear what they wanted to hear?
I can only infer that the gangrape was an attempt at vigilante justice. Taking the law into one's own hands is thorny at best, but rape is one of the most disgusting uses of power imaginable. I have understanding for the perpetrators only to the extent that they probably have been entirely indoctrinated into a way of thinking that justifies such actions, but that understanding is miniscule at best.
Who are the real criminals here? The rapists are the most obvious culprits. The unfaithful man and woman are also at fault, but there is a case to be made for them being victims of circumstance and there is something to be said about their attempt to escape the shackles of their religious oppression.
My opinion is that the real problem, the real crime, is not questioning and changing arcane religious doctine that dehumanizes and justifies despicable events like this. This man and woman were victims and then they were punished for it. Even if you think that they are wrong for their alleged infidelity, in no way is their rape justifiable.
Believe what you want to believe, but be aware of the oppression and injustice that may result when you unquestioningly accept dogma and doctrine that is given to you.
Source
The woman later confessed to cheating on her husband, so her and the man's punishments were increased to 200 lashes. Surprising to me, their attackers' punishments were also increased.
Adultery is a punishable offense under Islamic law, and, since Saudi Arabia is a theocratic state, such barbarism is completely legitimate in their eyes.
I have huge problems when the state and religion are commingled in such a way. In my mind, government has no place dictating the morality and punishment of actions like adultery. There, of course, should be recourse for the cheated upon spouse, but nothing like a state imposed sentence of whipping.
Moreover, I am greatly opposed to ideas within a religion that vindicate the unethical, savage behavior of the Saudi state towards its constituents.
It is reasonable to assume that this woman was forced into this marriage and was extremely unhappy, so I can understand why she may want to escape her marriage. However, I wonder under what conditions she confessed this adultery? Was it under duress and torture? Did she confess only so that her accusers would hear what they wanted to hear?
I can only infer that the gangrape was an attempt at vigilante justice. Taking the law into one's own hands is thorny at best, but rape is one of the most disgusting uses of power imaginable. I have understanding for the perpetrators only to the extent that they probably have been entirely indoctrinated into a way of thinking that justifies such actions, but that understanding is miniscule at best.
Who are the real criminals here? The rapists are the most obvious culprits. The unfaithful man and woman are also at fault, but there is a case to be made for them being victims of circumstance and there is something to be said about their attempt to escape the shackles of their religious oppression.
My opinion is that the real problem, the real crime, is not questioning and changing arcane religious doctine that dehumanizes and justifies despicable events like this. This man and woman were victims and then they were punished for it. Even if you think that they are wrong for their alleged infidelity, in no way is their rape justifiable.
Believe what you want to believe, but be aware of the oppression and injustice that may result when you unquestioningly accept dogma and doctrine that is given to you.
Source
$25,000 dessert. Only one dessert...
Does anyone else see something disgustingly wrong with this? Full story about a chocolate dessert that costs $25,000 for one serving.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)