this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
601 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59168 readers
3126 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 68 points 1 month ago (15 children)

ITT: omg how other people don't see what I, a very smart and superior person who browses technology communities, have known for years

we should be celebrating that privacy issues are gaining more and more mainstream coverage.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Prox@lemmy.world 53 points 1 month ago

That's literally the sales pitch to investors, and has been for decades.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We need you Lina Khan. We need you, but stronger, faster, better. Let's fucking go.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 1 month ago

Yeah, no shit!

[–] potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id 31 points 1 month ago

In other news, the sky is blue.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 30 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Don't forget their 1427 trusted data partners!

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago
[–] loutr@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

But it's their legitimate interest! ^Whatever ^that ^means

[–] harsh3466@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

FTC says water is wet.

Edit: in all seriousness, it’s good that the FTC is talking about this, and it’ll be even better if it does something to combat it.

[–] cjriebe@lemmy.riebe.cloud 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

This is why I’m slowly migrating to the Fediverse.

Fuck social media companies.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 34 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

We're watching you too.

Now, entertain us, we are bored.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

Yep, all they gotta do is well, very little.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, the Fediverse isn't any more private, but at least it doesn't care much about your data. That said, any company could come and harvest all of that data if it wanted since it's open.

The Fediverse isn't the final step here.

[–] cjriebe@lemmy.riebe.cloud 6 points 1 month ago

I understand that, but it's more about the targeted advertisements, sponsored posts, etc. Just give me my goddamn content and leave me alone LOL

[–] yemmly@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

I like that someone in a position of authority is talking about this.

[–] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 1 month ago

Yeah no shit.

[–] fubarx@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 month ago
[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It is fine to have casual knowledge of or a hunch about something, but far better to have the research and analysis to prove it.

[–] Rob200@lemmy.autism.place 16 points 1 month ago

They don't say.

[–] powermaker450@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 month ago

NO. REALLY?

[–] aaaaace@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago
[–] jeena@piefed.jeena.net 10 points 1 month ago

So this is why I switched to the fediverse. But to be honest, I have no idea if someone does things like that here or not. All my posts are public to everyone and machine readable. The only thing which would prevent someone of survailing users on the fediverse is it's very small scale. It is probably just not worth the effort.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Rule #1: anybody who can get you to give them your information of likes, dislikes just about anything will sell it to other people, or use it for their own sales to you.

Rule #2: If anyone has any reason to make you accept terms and conditions and there's any chance that they you may want to sue them in future, they're going to slip in a binding arbitration clause unless it is legally difficult for them to do so.

Wake up FTC it's not just social media it's deeply embedded everywhere in commerce and society and it needs to be addressed RFN.

[–] marlowe221@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Allow me to reveal my age by saying… No, duh!!!

[–] protist@mander.xyz 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] KellysNokia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

In idiom meta for this scenario, most Lemmy users are what would be considered 'the choir'

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Gotta wonder why they're saying this now? What's the agenda?

[–] Mellow12@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The new-ish Federal Trade Commission head has been making a push to work on quite a few projects for the past couple of years. They have a very small resources and man-power compared to the war chests of multibillion dollar companies, but recently, somehow managed to bring charges against Google as a monopoly. This in my opinion is a good thing. I consider myself a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. I don’t like how our government seems to take the money of these companies and turn a blind eye as they do what they want in pursuit of the almighty dollar. I support her endeavors working for the interests of the majority of people and not those few with the most money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] protist@mander.xyz 12 points 1 month ago

Have you considered that the answers you seek may be in the article?

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 12 points 1 month ago

Lina Khan actually takes action against companies unlike many of her predecessors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

anti-Social ones. this all public btw.

load more comments
view more: next ›