The privacy price we pay for “free” food
This summer, we’re opening our blog to guest bloggers eager to share their perspectives on privacy. In this blog, Jeff Brown argues that when we agree to let companies get our private data – or not – we make a conscious decision but the most vulnerable are those who don’t understand that they’ve made a choice.
Click here to see the full blog post
QuHno last edited by
The list on wikipedia is only a fraction of those sites that got hacked and only those which made public waves, but some sites did not need hacking because they were wide open to the public like e.g. this https://quhno.vivaldi.net/2019/06/02/first-american-exposed-885-millions-of-full-datasets-translation-of-their-statement-to-plain-english/ Yes, the "translation" is cynical, but as long as nothing changes in that regard, no matter what we do to protect ourselves we must live with the fact that our data is in the open and we can't take it back.
Of course we shouldn't feed the data collectors more data than is strictly necessary to deliver the contents / goods or else we could give in and send the crooks and data collectors the money directly - no more need for data collection, because those greedy (insert appropriate swearword here) only do it for the money, and we would give it to them. </rant>