- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
I changed the title from “Spying” to “Eavesdropping” because the article actually directly supports that it is “spying” on you, just not listening.
You must log in or register to comment.
Article warns that you will be profiled based on interests.
Article then profiles you based on interests. Proceeds to sell you VPN subscriptions.
Anecdote: (a little background) I don’t typically deal with narcissistic people; I’m not troubled by narcissists in my life. My tech life is pretty well locked down, but it could always be better (working on it). And my YouTube suggestions are tightly, carefully curated to topics pertinent to my professional and personal projects.
I had an utter piece of shit contractor working for me on a project; he was a grifting, conniving, manipulative shitbag. When I outright fired his ass, he first got all self-righteous then tried to play the victim, but I wasn’t playing any of his games. My phone was sitting on the workbench next to me.
The next day, I opened YouTube because an engineer I know told me he dropped a new video on software we recently discussed. There among my suggestions were a bunch of videos on how to deal with narcissists. So somehow, in only talking with the contractor (he doesn’t use email, text, or other electronic communications), YouTube decided I was curious about dealing with narcissism. I’m morbidly curious how YouTube made that decision, and whether it was audio or “we know you’re associating with this guy who we identify as a problematic narcissist and here are some resources.”
Now, I’m just some douchecanoe on the internet and you should probably dismiss me based on that alone. But GODDAMN, the data points sure do pile up quickly on how deeply we’re being surveilled.
Imagine all the times you’ve had a conversation with somebody where you didn’t identify a pattern match with your YouTube recommendations.
This can be as “simple” as your phones being in close proximity to each other for an extended period, and sharing device advertising IDs/other device data via WiFi, Bluetooth. Might be more to it, but it’s a likely factor.
Devices do this regularly btw, smartphones also scrape for WiFi networks to better geolocate etc.
It sounds like this guy doesn’t have a smartphone though
Correct. I can definitively say “I don’t know how this happened.” But I do know it creeps me out and spurs me to speed up my privacy efforts.
@Marty_Man_X@lemmy.world and @TORFdot0@lemmy.world both make great points, both of which can certainly explain the sudden change in suggestions.
Not to counter your anecdote with my own. But I have been getting a lot of email spam pushing books and workshops dealing with narcissistic or toxic employees and I don’t even manage anyone so it may just be that firing toxic people is hot right now as far as workplace issues and any trend has people trying to make a buck off it
I am not downplaying the phone spying on me, I imagine it is.
But ads are the least of my concerns. I see less ads now than at any other time in my life.
So how do I know if it is happening to me?
I believe this is how you know:
Cogito, ergo sum res venalis
- René Descartes
Tap for spoiler
Translation for ease
I think, therefore I am a product to be sold
Article littered with affiliate links.
And it also doesn’t make sense.
Which part didn’t make sense?
So this article is suspect. It says that we’re not being recorded so some distance advertiser can run ads, yet Alphonso was caught doing just that.
Do better “journalists”
Unless you are aware of further developments than I am, Alphonso required permissions and provided a consent dialog so it could not be considered spying or eavesdropping.
no, its built into other apps. doesnt ask for anything then, the other apps do, Alphonso just listens in those apps
I stopped reading when it started suggesting VPNs. Your’re far more likely to be profiled by a VPN provider than your ISP.
Privacy is not a product you can purchase.
I live in a country where our ISPs are required by law to keep a record of our internet metadata. When ISPs have been subpoenaed in the past ths answer has often been “we don’t keep that data”.
So in that case we’re looking at a likelihood of 1 vs less than 1. So you’re wrong there.
Plus, I would love to hear your source on these probabilities you proclaim. Can you share how you know this?
You said “far more likely”, so one assumes you have the numbers.
